get_hl_clearinghouse_state

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

Annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe-read profile, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: no authentication required, and the important trap that builder positions are silently hidden without `dex` — an agent could otherwise misread an empty result as a flat account.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence carries information. The closing two clauses ('does NOT show builder positions' and 'will look empty without dex') restate the same caveat, which is mild redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey what comes back; naming positions and margin covers the essentials for a read tool. It could say more about the shape or scope of the returned state, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns above baseline by explaining the consequence of omitting `dex` (empty-looking result) and giving a concrete example format ('xyz'). That is semantics the schema's terse field description does not convey.

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 and resource ('Get account state (positions, margin) on a HyperLiquid DEX') and scopes it to the HyperLiquid DEX, which helps separate it from generic siblings like get_account_state or get_perp_positions. However, it never names which sibling to prefer when the agent wants spot state or perp positions specifically.

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?

Gives clear operational context for the optional `dex` parameter: builder/HIP-3 positions live under their own dex and will appear empty without it. This is real when-to-use guidance, though it stops short of naming alternative tools for related queries.

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