Order Book Depth

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint) and adds context that the output includes bid/ask levels. While annotations already convey the read-only nature, the description enriches understanding of the return value.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and result. Every word contributes value; no superfluous content.

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 single parameter, high schema coverage, presence of output schema, and annotations, the description is adequate. It could mention the level of detail (e.g., number of levels) but is sufficient for agent understanding.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'symbol', with an example value in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool retrieves order book depth with bid/ask levels. The verb 'Get' and resource 'order book depth' are specific, and the parenthetical '(bid/ask levels)' adds precision. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'quote' or 'intraday' by focusing on depth levels.

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 implies usage when bid/ask levels are needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use 'quote' instead). No when-not-to-use or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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