QuerySmallAssetConvertOrder

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses API key permission and rate limit, which are helpful. However, it does not clarify read-only nature, idempotency, or error behavior. The pagination mechanism (cursor, size) is implied but not explained.

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 with two sentences plus bullet points, no redundancy. It front-loads the main purpose and then adds permission/rate limit. However, it could be slightly more structured with parameter mappings.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks details on pagination behavior, return format, and parameter dependencies. For a query tool, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand its usage.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'order number' and 'time range' filters but does not explicitly map to parameters (e.g., quoteId, startTime, endTime). The meaning of cursor, size, and accountType is left to inference.

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 it is a paginated query for small asset conversion history records with filtering options, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like SmallAssetConvert or QuerySmallAssetList. The verb 'query' and resource 'history records' are clear, though sibling differentiation is not explicit.

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 mentions filtering by order number and time range but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as QuerySmallAssetList or QueryOrderByPage. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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