get_hl_top_traders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds two facts not in structured data: no authentication required and a 15-minute cache (meaning results can be stale). It omits how many traders are returned and what fields come back, but the caching disclosure is the operationally important one.

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 with zero filler: the action and scope come first, then the operational facts (auth, cache). Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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 read-only single-parameter lookup with annotations and no output schema, the description covers selection and invocation adequately. It leaves a meaningful gap on the result shape: it never says how many top traders are returned or what fields each entry has, which matters since there is no output schema to fall back on.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the description's enumeration of the three sort values merely restates the schema's own 'volume', 'tradeCount', 'deposit' list. It adds no default behavior or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 top HyperLiquid perp traders') plus the three ranking dimensions, which separates it from get_hl_top_traders_by_pnl (PnL-ranked) by implication. It does not explicitly name the near-duplicate sibling get_top_traders, so an agent must infer the difference from the 'HyperLiquid perp' qualifier.

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 sort options imply when to pick this tool (volume/count/deposit ranking) and 'No auth' tells the agent no credentials are needed. However, it never says when NOT to use it or points to get_hl_top_traders_by_pnl / get_top_traders as alternatives for different ranking or venue needs.

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