get_order_book

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It uses the verb 'Fetch', indicating a read-only operation, and details the output structure (levels, cumulative size, notional). It does not mention error conditions or permission requirements, but for a simple fetch this is adequate.

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 two short sentences. The first front-loads the core behavior and output details; the second adds minor context about centrality. Both are concise and non-redundant. No unnecessary flourish.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: return contents and the token scoping. Combined with the schema, this gives sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema: it mentions 'top N levels' which aligns with the depth parameter, and 'one outcome token' echoes the token_id description. No additional semantic value is provided beyond what the schema already states.

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 fetches a live order book for one outcome token, enumerating specific return elements (best bid/ask, mid, spread, top N levels). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_quote or get_price_history, which are not about order book depth.

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 provides clear context that this is the order book tool and even calls itself 'the central tool of this server', implying it is the primary choice for order book data. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for a typical use case.

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