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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds that the data is live and consists of bids/asks for perp markets, but it does not disclose response structure, depth semantics beyond the schema, or any potential rate-limit or market-specific caveats.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the usage trigger and efficiently packs in the market scope (Hyperliquid perps) and data type (bids/asks). There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with two fully documented parameters and clear safety annotations, this description covers the essential what, when, and where. It specifies the exact market type and return content (bids/asks), which is enough for an agent to select and correctly invoke the tool.

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% — both symbol and depth have clear descriptions in the schema itself. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 explicitly states the tool gets 'the live order book (bids/asks) for a Hyperliquid perp market' — a specific verb, resource, and market domain. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_price and get_candles, which serve different data needs.

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 opening 'Use this when the user wants...' provides an explicit activation condition tied to a user request for live order-book data. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the condition alone is sufficient to route an agent to this tool for order-book queries.

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