subscribeOrderbook

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. However, the description does not explain important behavioral traits: it does not disclose that the tool likely waits for messageCount messages or a timeout, whether it returns one snapshot or a stream, or what 'subscribe-snapshot 模式' actually means. No contradiction with annotations, but little added behavioral context.

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?

The description is a single short sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. However, the parenthetical 'subscribe-snapshot 模式' is unexplained jargon, and the extreme brevity leaves out needed details, so it is not a perfect score.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and numerous related subscribe/get siblings, this description is severely inadequate. It provides no information about return payloads, subscription lifecycle, parameter semantics, or how this differs from other orderbook tools. An agent cannot reliably select or invoke this tool based solely on the description.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention depth enum values, symbol format, category default, timeoutMs behavior, or messageCount semantics. The phrase '深度快照' only vaguely relates to the depth parameter, providing no actionable meaning for invoking the tool correctly.

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 states a specific verb (订阅/subscribe) and resource (订单薄深度快照/orderbook depth snapshot), and names a mode (subscribe-snapshot). It is clear about the core purpose but does not differentiate from sibling tools like getOrderbook or subscribeSpreadOrderbook, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getOrderbook, subscribeRpiOrderbook, or subscribeSpreadOrderbook. The description does not mention whether this is a WebSocket subscription, how it relates to connection lifecycle tools like startSubscription/stopSubscription, or what scenarios favor snapshot mode over other modes.

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