get_spot_l4_orderbook_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. Description adds context: returns periodic full order-level snapshots for reconstruction, and live data availability from a specific date. No contradictions.

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, no filler. First sentence states core purpose and tier, second explains behavior and data recency. Every phrase is meaningful.

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 output schema exists and annotations are rich, description covers essential behavioral traits (snapshots, time range, live start date) without needing to detail return values. Complete for agent decision-making.

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. Description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what's in schema, though it reinforces the symbol format. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states verb ('Get'), resource ('Hyperliquid Spot L4 orderbook checkpoints'), and scope (Build+ tier, dashed canonical symbols). Distinguishes from siblings by specifying spot and L4, and notes live data start date.

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?

Implies usage for L4 orderbook reconstruction over a time range with Build+ tier. Does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the specificity to spot L4 helps differentiate from non-spot L4 history tools present in siblings.

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