recent_liquidations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose two useful behaviors: the tool requires CLUBY_INDEXER_URL and returns an empty list when it is missing. It also implies a read-only observation via 'has seen,' which is appropriate given the nature of the tool.

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?

Two short sentences: the first states the resource, the second covers the prerequisite and failure mode. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description tells the agent what it returns and how it behaves when the indexer URL is absent. It does not describe fields, ordering, or 'recent' semantics, but the low complexity and lack of an output schema make this a minor gap rather than a critical one.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is complete, so the baseline of 4 applies. The only external dependency, CLUBY_INDEXER_URL, is mentioned separately and is not an input-schema parameter.

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 identifies the resource ('liquidations') and the source ('the indexer'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools about markets, vaults, positions, and quotes. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'list' or 'returns', but the meaning 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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives. It only states an environmental prerequisite, CLUBY_INDEXER_URL, but does not mention siblings like market_history or get_market that might be considered for similar lookups.

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