Hyperliquid perp markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds that results are live and sorted by 24h volume, which tells the agent how to interpret ordering and freshness of the returned list. It omits rate-limit or pagination behavior beyond the schema's limit cap.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering. The long field enumeration is dense but justified since there is no output schema; nothing is redundant, though the field list pushes the single sentence to its limit.

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?

With no output schema, enumerating returned fields (price, change, volume, OI, funding, tiers) is the right call and makes the tool callable as-is. Minor gap: it doesn't say whether limit is ignored when coins is supplied, or what happens for unknown coin names.

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% — both params are documented with examples and a default of 20 — so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the filter-vs-limit dichotomy without adding format, precedence, or truncation semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific resource (Hyperliquid perp markets) with a specific verb/behavior (sorts by 24h volume) and enumerates exactly what data comes back. The resource is clearly distinct from siblings like hl_positions or liquidation_map, so an agent can select it without ambiguity.

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?

"Filter by coins or take the top N" names the two invocation modes but gives no guidance on when to choose one over the other, when to use this vs. a sibling such as hl_positions, or what happens when both parameters are supplied. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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