get_hl_top_traders_by_pnl

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

Annotations only declare readOnly/openWorld, so the description carries useful extra load: no auth required, a 15-minute cache (important for freshness expectations), and a hard cap of 30 results. The 'data by day/week/month' clause is unexplained behaviorally since no parameter selects the window.

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?

Four short clauses, front-loaded with purpose, then granularity, auth, and caching. Telegraphese but every clause carries information; only the ambiguous 'data by day/week/month' phrase costs it a point.

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-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (top 30 perp traders, ranked by PnL), auth requirements, and cache freshness. The unresolved day/week/month wording is the only real gap.

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 would be 4, but the description claims 'Data by day/week/month' without any parameter to choose a period. That raises a question the schema cannot answer and slightly undermines confidence in what a call returns.

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+scope: 'top 30 HyperLiquid perp traders ranked by PnL'. This clearly separates it from generic siblings like get_top_traders and get_top_tokens, though it never explicitly contrasts with the near-identical get_hl_top_traders.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance beyond the implicit 'want top perp traders by PnL'. It does not address the obvious overlap with get_hl_top_traders or get_top_traders, which an agent must disambiguate on its own.

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