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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It makes clear the tool returns a read-only market snapshot rather than performing any mutation, but says nothing about pagination, whether the board is truncated, rate limits, or freshness of the data. Authoritative content disclosure, thin on operational behavior.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its field list, with the payoff context last. Minor waste in the redundant 'x402-hyperliquid-perps:' prefix restating the tool name.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the enumeration of returned fields does real work, and sort is partially covered. The main gap is the undocumented 'limit' parameter for a board that could span every listed perp.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully defines the sort dimension ('Sortable by volume, open interest, funding or leverage') but leaves 'limit' entirely undefined and gives no accepted value format for sort beyond the four dimensions named.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Hyperliquid perpetual futures overview across every listed perp') and enumerates exactly which fields come back (mark/oracle/mid, funding, OI, 24h volume, max leverage). The 'across every listed perp' scope also implicitly separates it from narrower siblings like x402-hyperliquid-funding, x402-hyperliquid-mids and x402-hyperliquid-book.

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?

'One call gives a perp trading agent the full board before it commits capital' describes the intended moment of use, but there is no explicit when-not guidance and no sibling tool is named as an alternative. Usage is implied rather than instructed.

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