paradex_bbo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the tool provides minimal data for quick decisions, which is consistent and provides additional context beyond the annotation.

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 well-structured with bullet points and examples, and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it is slightly verbose with some repetition (e.g., the first sentence is restated later).

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 tool's simplicity (1 param, read-only, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, examples, and context completely. No gaps remain for an agent to understand when and how 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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'market_id' already described as 'Market symbol to get BBO for.' The description does not add further semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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 gets the best available prices for immediate execution decisions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like paradex_orderbook (full depth) and paradex_market_summaries by emphasizing minimal data for quick decisions.

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 explicitly lists when to use (quick trading decisions, calculate spread costs, etc.) and provides example use cases. It implies when not to use by stating 'when full orderbook depth isn't needed' but does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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