place_groww_cover_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It mentions mandatory stop loss, but that is already evident from the required schema field. It does not disclose whether authentication is needed, how the order executes, error behavior, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation 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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundant words. It earns its place by stating the core function concisely, though the brevity leaves gaps in other dimensions.

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 has 10 parameters, 6 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain the cover order mechanism, the role of stop loss in triggering the order, authentication prerequisites, or the response format. This is inadequate for an agent to use the tool confidently.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the mandatory stop loss, which is already reflected in the required fields. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Place Cover Order on Groww - order with mandatory stop loss', identifying the action (place), the resource (cover order on Groww), and a key constraint (mandatory stop loss). This distinguishes it from generic 'place_cover_order' and other Groww-specific order tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'place_cover_order' or other order types. There is no mention of prerequisites such as broker authentication or scenarios where cover orders are appropriate. Usage is only implied by the name and brief description.

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