get_open_interest

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. 'Retrieve' implies a safe read, and it explains the meaning of the metric (conviction/liquidity indicator), but it states nothing about authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or what the aggregate actually represents. Some value added, but major traits undisclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and reasonably tight. The middle sentence about open interest as an indicator of conviction/liquidity is contextual but somewhat filler relative to invocation needs, though not egregious.

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?

For a single optional parameter read tool with an output schema present, the description covers the essential invocation semantics. Return values need not be explained given the output schema, leaving only minor gaps around data source and timeliness.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: condition_id is described as the unique on-chain market condition identifier, and the omission semantics (global aggregate) are spelled out. This adds meaning well beyond the bare schema property name.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (open interest), defines it as total outstanding shares, and covers both market-scoped and global scope. It is clear and distinguishable from data siblings like get_price, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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 gives a useful usage signal: omit condition_id to get a global aggregate. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance and does not say when open interest is preferable over related market-data tools such as get_spread or get_order_books.

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