Calculate Hyperliquid fees

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds that this is a transparent estimate, not an exchange quote, providing important behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 concise sentences with all essential information front-loaded. No extraneous text.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 params, output schema exists), the description provides a high-level overview but lacks details on edge cases, rounding, or assumptions. It is mostly complete for a simple estimate tool.

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?

The description lists categories of parameters (notional, role, tier, discounts, etc.) but does not detail their meanings or constraints. Schema coverage is only 30%, so the description partially compensates but falls short of fully explaining the 10 parameters.

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 estimates Hyperliquid spot or perpetual trading fees, listing the inputs and distinguishing it from an exchange quote. The verb 'estimate' and resource 'Hyperliquid trading fees' are specific and 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?

The description mentions the tool provides a transparent estimate, not a quote, but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools are unrelated, so no explicit differentiation.

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