atas_dom

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the output composition, ordering of asks and bids, and per-side level limiting, which is meaningful for an order book tool.

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 concise sentences deliver the essential purpose and the key parameter behavior with no redundant wording. The main description is front-loaded with the resource and order semantics.

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 straightforward one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description provides enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly. It explains the input semantics and the expected structure of the order book response.

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?

Although schema coverage is 0%, the description clearly explains the only parameter, 'levels', as limiting the number of levels per side. This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's minimal title and default value.

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 identifies the resource as current market depth (DOM / order book) and specifies both sides: asks and bids, along with their ordering. This differentiates it from sibling quote and candle tools even without naming them.

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 implies use when order book depth is needed and clarifies how the 'levels' argument affects output, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over atas_quote or atas_snapshot, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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