place_amo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions next-day execution but omits critical information such as the order submission process, the need for an active broker, potential rejection, or the financial impact. This is insufficient for a mutation-like trading action.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. It is well-structured and free of waste, though it is somewhat terse for the complexity of the operation, it effectively communicates the core function.

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 complexity (11 parameters, 6 required, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not address prerequisites like broker authentication, the distinction between AMO and regular orders beyond execution timing, or the operational steps. An agent would be underinformed for making a real financial transaction.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, with descriptions for all 11 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not elevate it.

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 the tool's function: placing an After Market Order (AMO) for next-day execution. It uses a specific verb 'Place' and a distinct asset type 'AMO', which differentiates it from sibling order placement tools like create_order or place_bracket_order.

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 conveys when to use this tool: for AMO orders that execute the next day. This provides clear context for the tool's intended use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives for other order types, so it lacks direct exclusions but the context is still clear.

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