Hyperliquid markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds context: 'Read-only, public data, no API key,' which reinforces safety and accessibility. It also describes the output fields (prices, funding, OI, etc.) beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful: first lists what the tool returns, second explains how to use with a symbol, third gives temporal context and links to alternative. Front-loaded with essential information, no unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers return data, usage patterns, and alternative tool. It could mention pagination or sorting but those are minor. With strong annotations, this is sufficiently complete for a read-only data query tool.

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. The description adds value by providing examples (e.g., 'BTC or PURR') and clarifying default behaviors ('Rows in the list. Default 10,' 'Default perp,' 'Omitted = top by volume'). This goes 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?

The description clearly states it provides current prices and market state on Hyperliquid for perp and spot, listing specific data points. It distinguishes itself from the sibling hl_funding tool by noting it is a current snapshot versus past funding behavior.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: for current snapshot, and when not: for past funding data, directing to hl_funding. Also explains behavior when symbol is omitted (top by volume) and when symbol is provided (shows predicted funding side by side with Binance and Bybit).

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