get_hl_all_assets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one behavioral fact: no authentication is required. However it says nothing about rate limits, response shape, pagination, or whether the list is exhaustive, and the read-only nature is only implied by 'Get'.

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 short clauses, zero waste, with the primary purpose and the return payload front-loaded. Nothing needs trimming.

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 zero-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (tradeable assets plus max leverage) and the auth posture. Without an output schema it could say a bit more about the returned fields, but nothing essential to invoking it is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline the schema carries no semantic load the description must compensate for. The description correctly describes a no-argument call.

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+resource ('Get all tradeable assets on HyperLiquid') and adds the payload detail (max leverage info). It does not differentiate itself from a close sibling like get_hl_meta_and_asset_ctxs or get_hl_perp_dexes, which an agent could reasonably confuse it with.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent gathers that this lists assets for discovery. The 'No auth' note gives useful context on callability, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance, and the near-duplicate siblings are not mentioned.

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