Get All Pending Orders

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations, including a rate limit (1 req / 5s) and the specific list of fields included in each order, enriching what the agent can expect.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and well-structured: a clear opening sentence on purpose, a compact list of included fields, and a final rate-limit note. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with no parameters and rich annotations, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool returns, the filtering criteria, and an operational constraint (rate limit). No output schema is present, but the description fills that gap adequately.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter schema to document. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description compensates by thoroughly explaining the return content, which effectively substitutes for parameter documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Retrieve'), resource ('all currently active pending orders'), and scope ('those not yet filled, cancelled, or expired'), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_historical_orders and get_order_by_id. The exclusion of cancelled/expired orders adds precision.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context by defining what constitutes a pending order and explicitly excludes filled, cancelled, or expired orders. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is evident enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.