hyperliquid

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden itself. It usefully notes 'Not geo-blocked' and that funding is hourly, which are genuine behavioral traits. It omits auth requirements, rate limits, and whether data is real-time or delayed, so it is only partially transparent.

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 core sentence is duplicated verbatim ('Hyperliquid perpetual context: funding (hourly)...' repeated twice), wasting roughly half the description. The example is useful, but the redundancy is a clear structural flaw.

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 one-parameter read-only data endpoint with no output schema, the description does list the returned fields, which compensates for the missing output schema. Only the sibling-overlap and auth/pagination details are absent, which are minor for this tool type.

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 100% with a single required 'symbol' parameter that the schema already documents fully with examples. The description adds only the example query string, which restates the same parameter usage rather than adding new 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?

The description names the specific resource (Hyperliquid perpetual context) and enumerates the exact data points returned (funding, open interest, mark/oracle/mid price, premium, 24h volume), so an agent knows what it fetches. However, it never differentiates itself from overlapping siblings like funding_oi, price, or orderbook, which cover adjacent data.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus the many overlapping market-data siblings (funding_oi, price, ohlcv, basis). The example URL shows a call shape but gives no selection guidance or exclusions.

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