get_orderbook

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds parameter-specific behavioral details (limit ranges per category), but does not disclose other traits like rate limits, output format, or snapshot nature.

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 concise: one summary line followed by parameter details. No extraneous text, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers input semantics. It could mention that it returns a snapshot of bids/asks, but standard terminology and annotations make this acceptable.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains all three parameters: category (lists values), symbol (example), and limit (with per-category ranges). This adds essential meaning 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 'Query order book depth data', using a specific verb-resource combination that uniquely identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like get_tickers and get_kline by focusing on depth data.

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 implicitly indicates use for order book depth but lacks explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. No comparison to similar tools or mention of prerequisites.

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