ultrade_market_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get orders' implies a read operation but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or return format. It does not address whether it retrieves all orders, filtered orders, or specific subsets, leaving critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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 'Get orders' is extremely concise but under-specified, not efficiently informative. While it avoids unnecessary words, it fails to front-load essential details, making it too brief to be helpful rather than optimally structured.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a vague description, the tool is incomplete for a read operation with 4 parameters. It lacks context on what 'orders' entails, how results are returned, or differentiation from siblings, making it inadequate for effective agent use despite the schema covering inputs.

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 the input schema already documents all parameters (walletAddress, walletToken, tradingKey, companyId) with descriptions. The description adds no meaning beyond this, such as explaining relationships between parameters or usage examples, but the schema provides adequate baseline information.

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 'Get orders' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'ultrade_market_orders' without adding specificity. It does not clarify what type of orders (e.g., open, historical, by ID) or distinguish it from sibling tools like 'ultrade_market_open_orders' or 'ultrade_market_order_by_id', leaving the purpose vague and undifferentiated.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings such as 'ultrade_market_open_orders' and 'ultrade_market_order_by_id', it fails to specify context, exclusions, or prerequisites, offering no help for selection among similar tools.

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