get_l2_diffs

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds context about returning price-level changes over a time range, which is consistent and informative beyond 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?

One sentence with key info (function, level, tier, output). No wasted words. Could be slightly more structured, but effective.

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 output schema exists and annotations are rich, the description covers the core functionality. However, it lacks mention of pagination (cursor/limit) or that diffs are incremental, which could be useful for an agent. Otherwise adequate.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the description does not need to add much. It mentions 'time range' aligning with start/end, but no additional parameter semantics beyond 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 it retrieves L2 orderbook diffs (price-level changes) over a time range, distinguishing it from siblings like get_l2_orderbook (snapshot) and get_l2_orderbook_history (historical snapshots).

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 'Pro+ tier' indicating access restriction, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., differences from get_l2_diffs vs get_l2_orderbook). No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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