get_hip3_liquidation_volume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context: case sensitivity, data availability from February 2026, and output fields (total, long, short USD volumes). No contradictions with annotations.

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 (two sentences), front-loaded with the main action and output. It efficiently communicates key details without extraneous information, though could include a brief note on when to use.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown) and detailed annotations, the description adequately covers key aspects. It mentions time-bucketed intervals and data availability, but does not explain pagination (though cursor param exists) or clearly differentiate from similar siblings. Sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters with descriptions. The description briefly mentions case sensitivity and an example symbol, but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 aggregated HIP-3 liquidation volume for a coin in time-bucketed intervals, returning total, long, and short USD volumes. It specifies case sensitivity and data availability, distinguishing it from non-HIP-3 counterparts, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'get_hip3_liquidations' which likely provides raw events.

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 like get_hip3_liquidations or get_liquidation_volume. It implies use by describing aggregated volume, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements.

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