get_orderbook

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. Saying it is 'live' and includes 'bids and asks' gives basic content, but it does not state read-only semantics, depth limits, ordering, or potential errors.

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?

One concise, grammatically correct sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. It is efficient, though the lack of supporting detail suggests it is slightly under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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 has only one parameter and an output schema, so complexity is low, but the description leaves gaps in parameter meaning and usage guidance. It is not enough for an agent to confidently invoke the tool without additional assumptions.

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 0% and token_id has no description. The description only restates that the tool operates on an outcome token, giving no help on token_id format or how to retrieve it, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema semantics.

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 ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('live orderbook') and scope ('for a specific outcome token'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_market_details or get_open_orders.

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 implies when the tool is used (when an orderbook for a specific outcome token is needed) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives or any exclusions. No prerequisites or search steps for finding the token are mentioned.

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