get_hl_clearinghouse_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it discloses that no auth is required and warns that the default query silently omits builder positions, which is a real behavioral gotcha. It stops short of describing the returned shape or any pagination/rate-limit behavior.

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 purpose, then two tight sentences covering the dex caveat. Slight redundancy between 'Builder/HIP-3 positions live under their own dex' and 'default query does NOT show builder positions', but nothing is wasted.

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 two-param read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers auth status, scope, and the silent-empty pitfall that would otherwise cause wrong conclusions. Only the exact contents/format of the returned state are left implicit.

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 goes beyond the schema's 'Omit for the default USDC dex' by explaining the consequence of omitting `dex` (builder positions look empty) and giving a concrete example ('xyz:NVDA'). That adds meaning the schema alone doesn't 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 HL DEX, which separates it from the sibling get_account_state and the position-specific get_perp_positions. An agent can pick it out without opening the schema.

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 contextual guidance for the key trap: builder/HIP-3 positions require passing `dex`, and omitting it yields a misleading empty result. It doesn't name alternative tools to use instead, but the usage condition is explicit and actionable.

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