get_perps_overview

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

No annotations exist, so description covers key behaviors: returns volume, open interest, market share, and covers 50+ protocols. Lacks mention of data freshness or limits, but sufficient for a read-only overview.

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?

Description is concise at 4 sentences with clear structure: action, examples, use-case guidance. No redundant information.

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?

With output schema present, description adequately covers purpose, usage, and return fields. Complete enough for an agent to correctly 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 clear descriptions for chain and top_n. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline.

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 identifies top perpetuals/derivatives protocols ranked by 24h volume, specifies examples like Hyperliquid, dYdX, etc., and distinguishes it from sibling tools such as compare_perps and get_defi_overview.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use ('derivatives market intelligence') and when not to use ('spot DEX', 'yield') with alternative tool names (DeFiLlama DEX endpoints, get_best_yield).

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