Place Stop-Limit Order

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: the trigger mechanism, rate limit ('1 req / 2s'), and 'Protects against slippage.' It also reinforces the non-idempotent nature. This goes beyond the annotations but doesn't cover edge cases like partial fills or order lifecycle.

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 appropriately sized at five sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: mechanism, benefit, usage sign, idempotency, and rate limit. It is front-loaded with the core definition and does not waste words.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavioral semantics, usage sign, rate limit, and slippage benefit. It does not explain the return value or edge cases, but this is not critical for tool selection and invocation. Overall, it is well-rounded.

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?

Input schema covers all five parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds extra meaning by explaining the interplay between stopPrice and limitPrice ('when LTP reaches stopPrice a limit order is placed at limitPrice'), which clarifies their roles beyond simple definitions. It also emphasizes the sign convention for quantity, though that is already in the schema.

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 opens with 'Place a STOP-LIMIT order' and clearly explains the trigger mechanism ('when the Last Traded Price reaches stopPrice a limit order is placed at limitPrice'), which distinguishes it from sibling order types like market, limit, and stop orders. It also adds the benefit 'Protects against slippage,' reinforcing its purpose.

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 a clear context for use by stating the slippage protection benefit, and gives explicit instructions for buy vs sell using sign of quantity. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use this order type, so it lacks explicit exclusions. This is solid but not top-tier.

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