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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does it well by disclosing the return payload in concrete terms: conditionId, CLOB token ids, outcome names/prices, bid/ask, end date, and min price tick - which tells an agent this is trade-ready data, not a summary. It stops short of stating pagination behavior, result caps (relevant given the unexplained 'limit'), or any rate/auth constraints.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The payoff clause (what you get back) is front-loaded ahead of the routing clause, so the reader learns both capability and disambiguation in the right order.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating the return fields, so an agent knows what it will receive. The remaining gap is operational: nothing explains the 'limit' parameter or how many markets come back by default, which matters for a browse/list tool.

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 coverage is 0% and 'limit' is typed as a string with no explanation anywhere, so the description does not compensate for the most opaque parameter. It does convey that tag and category are the browsing axes, but leaves ambiguous whether they are combined or mutually exclusive alternatives.

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 (browse), a specific resource (Polymarket markets), the filter axis (tag/category), and enumerates the payload an agent will get back. It is clearly distinguishable from the several sibling Polymarket tools, which are named directly.

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?

Explicitly states the selecting condition ('use this when you know the category you want') and then names three alternatives with the condition that picks each: x402-poly-price for keyword search, x402-poly-markets for busiest markets, x402-polymarket-scan for whole events. Nothing is left to inference.

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