place_cover_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'intraday' and 'compulsory stop loss' as constraints, but says nothing about order lifecycle, execution behavior, auth requirements, or error handling. This is insufficient for a complex order placement tool.

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 key action and differentiator. It contains zero filler and is appropriately compact for its purpose.

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 (10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and numerous sibling order types), the one-line description is woefully incomplete. It omits prerequisites, return behavior, error conditions, and clear differentiation from similar tools like place_groww_cover_order.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all 10 parameters, including enums and required fields. The description adds no parameter-specific context, but the schema handles the semantic burden, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the action ('Place') and resource ('Cover Order (CO)'), with the defining characteristic 'intraday order with compulsory stop loss' that distinguishes it from other order types. It is immediately understandable and specific.

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 implies usage for intraday cover orders with a mandatory stop loss, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like bracket orders or other broker-specific order types. It offers a hint but lacks clear when/when-not context.

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