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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral aspects. It mentions the depth default and max, which is useful, but it does not state that the operation is read-only, what the response format is, or any rate-limit or permission considerations.

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?

Two tightly packed sentences with no redundant phrasing. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the param details are presented efficiently. Every clause adds value.

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?

While the description covers parameter semantics and basic behavior, it lacks information about the return payload structure (e.g., bid/ask levels, formatting) and potential edge cases. For a simple read tool, this is a moderate gap, not a fatal one.

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 fully compensate. It explicitly defines all three parameters, providing real-world examples for exchange and symbol, and specifies default and maximum values for depth. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 retrieves an orderbook depth snapshot for a given symbol on an exchange. This is specific and distinct from siblings like get_tickers or get_klines, which cover different market data.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives parameter examples but does not mention suitability conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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