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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is already covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the data is credential-free, sourced from Gamma events/keyset JSON tagged macro, and paginated via a keyset cursor with a hard max of 100. That is real behavioral value.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the data source, then the alternatives. The only waste is the verbatim restatement of the two parameter descriptions already present in the schema.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers the data source, credential-free access, and pagination bounds. Complete enough for an agent to call it correctly, with the only minor gap being the absence of explicit usage conditions.

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%, and the description repeats the schema's cursor and limit wording verbatim, adding no syntax, format, or meaning beyond what the schema already documents. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: returns normalized macroeconomic event rows for Polymarket's /dashboards/macro page, and names the underlying data source (Gamma events/keyset with the macro tag). It also distinguishes itself from the named sibling polymarket_homepage_feed, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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?

It points at polymarket_homepage_feed as the tool for homepage feed rows, which is a form of routing, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use condition for this tool itself. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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