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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds 'detailed info' but does not specify what fields are returned or any additional behavioral nuances. It is not misleading, but contributes little beyond the annotations.

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 a single concise sentence that gets straight to the point. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 simple one-parameter tool with good annotations and no output schema, the description is sufficient to understand the tool's purpose and primary input. However, 'detailed info' is vague; specifying what details are included would improve completeness.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameter with 'Event slug (from event.slug)', so the baseline is 3. The description only repeats 'by slug' without adding extra meaning or usage details for the parameter.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('detailed info for a specific Polymarket event'), and the identifier ('by slug'). This distinguishes it from siblings like getPolyMarketEvents, getPolyMarketEventsByTag, and searchPolyMarketEvents.

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 phrase 'by slug' clearly indicates when to use this tool: when you already have a specific event slug. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is clear from the description alone.

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