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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying the cross-platform scope (Polymarket, Kalshi, Limitless, Manifold) and filtering/sorting capabilities, which helps the agent understand the tool's behavior beyond 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 concise and well-structured. It opens with a clear verb and resource, provides usage examples, and adds filtering/sorting details in a compact three-sentence format without unnecessary fluff.

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 tool's browse/explore nature and the presence of helpful annotations, the description covers the core behavior and most key parameters. It misses some detail on 'limit' and 'real_money_only' and doesn't state output structure, but these are minor for a discovery tool and the overall context is sufficiently complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter documentation. It does explain 'sort by volume, newest, or ending soon' (mapping to sort_by) and mentions 'filter by category' (mapping to category). However, it does not cover 'limit' or 'real_money_only', leaving their semantics partially unexplained.

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 function with a specific verb ('Browse') and resource (prediction markets across multiple platforms). It also explicitly contrasts with searching a specific topic, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_markets.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance with example queries ('what's hot on Polymarket today') and a clear when-not-to-use condition ('rather than search a specific topic'). However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, so it falls just short of full 5.

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