futures_orderbook

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

No annotations provided; the description only states it retrieves depth data but omits details on snapshot vs. stream, rate limits, error handling, or data update frequency. The behavioral transparency is inadequate.

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?

A single, efficient sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without any filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

Lacks output schema information; no description of return structure (bids, asks, etc.). No behavioral or usage context. For a complex data-retrieval tool, this is insufficiently complete.

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%, and the parameter descriptions add meaningful context: symbol includes example 'BTCUSDT', limit explains default and unit (depth tier). This goes beyond the schema's raw type/required info.

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 action (获取/get) and resource (期货订单簿深度数据/futures order book depth data), making it distinct from siblings like futures_all_book_tickers or futures_agg_trades.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., futures_all_book_tickers for top-level quotes, indicator tools for analysis). The description does not specify use cases or prerequisites.

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