List DeepBook pools

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world safety, and the description adds genuinely new context: data is public, may be delayed or wrong, and is informational only. It stops short of describing pagination or output size behavior beyond the include_ids note.

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 and fields, followed by the filter and a brief disclaimer. Efficient overall, though the 'education only / not financial advice' boilerplate is slightly expendable.

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-optional-param, no-output-schema read tool with rich annotations, the description conveys what is returned and the staleness caveat. Sufficient to invoke correctly, with only minor gaps around output shape.

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 parameters are already fully documented. The description adds a small clarification that trading params are reported 'in human units', but offers nothing further on the asset or include_ids semantics.

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 ('List Sui DeepBook v3 spot pools') plus the data returned (base/quote assets, tick, lot, min size). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_pool_params and get_pool_stats, which concern a single pool's parameters/statistics.

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?

Mentions the optional asset-symbol filter and its intent, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings such as get_pool_params or get_pool_stats. Usage is implied (pool discovery) rather than stated.

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