Largest single liquidations and a 30-day session heatmap (counted venue feeds)

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

Annotations already mark it readOnly, but the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: data is from counted venues' public feeds, Binance is capped at one print per second per symbol and therefore its rows are a floor, and SELL means a long was liquidated. This goes well beyond what annotations provide.

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 front-loaded with a 'Call this when' opening and packs a lot of necessary detail into two sentences. It is slightly long and lists many output fields, but every clause earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 no output schema, the description fully covers what is returned: rank, symbol, venue, side semantics, price, quantity, notional, millisecond time, and the heatmap structure. It also gives the key Binance limitation unchecked. The agent has enough context to select and invoke it correctly.

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 schema already documents days, limit, and window fully. The description echoes the window values and mentions the 30-day heatmap, but does not add new parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the 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?

The description opens with explicit user intents: biggest liquidation today/week, who got liquidated the most, largest single print, and clustering by session. It also states the exact output (largest single liquidation prints plus a 30-day UTC heatmap), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_liquidations or get_liqmap.

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?

Provides clear when-to-call guidance with concrete examples ('when the user asks for the biggest liquidation today', 'when in the day or week liquidations cluster'). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, so it falls just short of a 5.

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