modify_order

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but 'Modify an existing order' is essentially a tautology. It does not explain preconditions, what fields are mutable, whether updates are partial or full, or what errors can occur.

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 front-loaded with the main action, and the argument list is easy to scan. It could be more structured, but no words are wasted.

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 four required parameters, no annotations, and only a bare output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not state when to use the tool, whether the order must exist, or what the response contains, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 description adds minimal semantic value by listing each parameter with a brief definition (e.g., 'coin: Trading pair'), which the schema lacks. However, it fails to explain relationships between parameters, format constraints, or optionality beyond the schema's required flags.

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 phrase 'Modify an existing order' clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'cancel_order' and 'place_limit_order'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar modification tools like 'update_leverage' or 'set_take_profit'.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is for changing size/price, nor does it contrast with cancel or other order-related operations.

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