pro_get_order_book

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It declares the tool is public ([PUBLIC]) and states the response structure: 'Returns bids (buy orders) and asks (sell orders) with prices and amounts' and 'Response is a single object.' This provides sufficient behavioral context for a read operation.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value: first states action, second specifies requirement, third provides use case. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the return data (bids, asks, prices, amounts) and practical use. It covers what the user needs to know to invoke and interpret results.

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% with parameter 'pair' described in the schema. The description repeats 'Requires trading pair (e.g., BTC-USD)' adding minimal additional meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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?

The description clearly states the tool gets the order book for a market, specifying the verb 'Gets' and resource 'order book (market depth)'. It mentions the required trading pair. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like pro_get_ticker or pro_get_candles, the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides a usage hint: 'Useful for analyzing market liquidity and determining optimal order prices.' However, it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to sibling tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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