get_orderbook

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only describes the output format. It does not disclose rate limits, authentication requirements, data freshness, or any side effects. The return structure alone is insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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 very short and to the point, but it sacrifices completeness. Every sentence earns its place, but the structure lacks a clear separation of purpose, parameters, and behavior.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description should cover symbol format, depth meaning, and usage context. It fails to do so, leaving significant gaps for an agent to make correct calls.

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 0%, and the description only implies the 'depth' parameter via 'Top-N'. The 'symbol' parameter is not explained at all (e.g., expected format, supported values). The output format illustration adds minimal context for parameters.

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 returns top-N order book levels with a specific output format, distinguishing it from siblings like get_ticker or get_candles. However, it could be more explicit about the verb (e.g., 'retrieve' vs 'get') and the scope (e.g., 'current' or '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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over others, such as get_ticker or get_candles. No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or alternatives, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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