get_clob_market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a read operation ('Get') and describes the return data (tokens, rewards, tick sizes, trading parameters), but doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, rate limits, error conditions, or pagination behavior for the returned data.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second sentence provides valuable information about the return data without any wasted 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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and return information but lacks important context. It doesn't explain the relationship to sibling tools, doesn't provide usage guidance, and with no annotations, leaves behavioral aspects like authentication and error handling unspecified.

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 schema already fully documents the single parameter. The description adds marginal value by emphasizing this is specifically for CLOB markets and mentioning what details are returned, but doesn't provide additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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's purpose: 'Get CLOB-specific market details by condition ID' specifies the verb (get) and resource (CLOB-specific market details), and distinguishes it from general market tools like get_market. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings like get_market_trades or get_order_book.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like get_market, get_market_trades, and get_order_book, the description doesn't indicate when this CLOB-specific tool is preferred over those general market tools or what makes it unique in context.

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