get_l4_orderbook_history

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

Describes that it returns periodic full order-level snapshots over a time range, adding behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction with readOnly, idempotent, or openWorld hints. Does not mention pagination or rate limits, but schema covers cursor.

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 sentences, 18 words, front-loaded with essential information. No redundant or verbose phrasing.

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?

Covers key aspects: tier, data type (order-level snapshots), time range. Missing mention of pagination despite cursor parameter, but output schema likely handles return details. Adequate for a well-structured tool with annotations.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters. Description adds context about 'time range' and 'reconstruction', but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding 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?

Clearly states it retrieves Hyperliquid L4 orderbook checkpoints, specifies the Pro+ tier, and indicates periodic full snapshots for reconstruction. Distinguishes from siblings like get_l4_orderbook which likely returns the current snapshot.

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?

Mentions Pro+ tier and reconstruction use case, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_l4_orderbook or get_l4_diffs. Provides implied context but lacks clear when-not or sibling differentiation.

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