get_order_book

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

The description says 'top-of-book' which typically means only the best bid and ask, but the depth parameter allows multiple levels (up to 50). This is misleading. No annotations exist, so the description should clarify the behavior but does not.

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 very short (one phrase), but it omits important context such as the return format or the effect of the depth parameter. It is concise but at the expense of completeness.

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 has three parameters and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain that order book data includes both bids and asks, how depth affects the output, or that exchange defaults to Bybit. The output schema may cover return values, but the description should provide more context for an agent to understand what is returned.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Top-of-book bids and asks' combined with the tool name 'get_order_book' clearly indicates it returns order book data, focusing on best bids and asks. However, it doesn't explicitly state that it returns a snapshot of multiple levels, which is suggested by the depth parameter.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_price or get_ohlcv. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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