get_hl_perp_dexes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add genuinely useful context by disclosing 'No auth', implying a safe public read, but says nothing about return shape, pagination, or caching/rate limits for a list endpoint.

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 sentences, verb-and-resource first, and no filler. Nothing extra is needed for a zero-parameter lookup.

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 no-arg, no-output-schema lookup this is close to complete: the resource and auth requirement are stated. Absent is any hint of what the returned DEX entries contain or how they should be used, which would help an agent chain this into a follow-up call.

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 the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Schema coverage is 100% regardless.

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 ('Get') and resource ('available perpetual DEX list on HyperLiquid'), so the agent knows exactly what is returned. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from similarly named siblings like get_copy_trade_dexes or get_hl_all_assets, but the resource is distinct enough to identify.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance or alternatives; 'No auth' is a useful precondition but not usage context. The agent must infer that this is a discovery/lookup call made before trading operations.

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