hl_perp_dexs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read-only operation via 'List', but does not mention idempotency, data freshness, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The output schema covers return values, but other behavioral aspects remain undocumented.

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, short sentence that gets to the point. It is concise and front-loaded, but it may be slightly under-specified given the lack of usage context. Still, for a no-parameter listing tool, it is appropriately sized.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, output schema exists) and the description is minimally viable. However, it leaves gaps in usage guidance and does not explain what 'perp dex deployments' means in the broader context of sibling tools. It is adequate but could be enhanced with a brief note on when to use it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially complete. There is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema already conveys, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and a specific resource 'perp dex deployments' (with the parenthetical 'perpDexs' clarifying the object). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like hl_perp_deploy_auction_status or hl_meta.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or how it relates to other listing tools. The description is purely declarative without any context.

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