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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the 7-day window, the returned fields, and that access is free. However, it omits ordering, pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, and whether results are cached or real-time, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the time window and the returned content immediately, and 'Free' is a concise useful signal.

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 read-only list tool with one optional enum parameter and no output schema, the description gives enough to understand what is returned and the time window. It does not cover ordering or pagination, but those are secondary for this low-complexity endpoint.

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% for the single optional category enum, so the schema already documents the parameter fully. The description adds no meaning about the category filter beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline 3.

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 a specific resource and scope: Vatic markets resolved in the last 7 days, with outcome, closing crowd odds, and favourite result. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling resolutions_feed, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative such as resolutions_feed. The word 'Free' hints at cost but does not tell an agent when this tool is preferable to another.

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