get_hip4_outcomes

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: outcome grouping ('<10*id>' Yes / '<10*id+1>' No), WebSocket event notification, and omission of aggregated_oi. No contradictions with 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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. No redundant phrases. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers key behavioral details (grouping, WebSocket, OI omission) and references sibling. With output schema present, return values are covered. Slight lack of pagination details, but overall 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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description only reiterates the is_settled filter and implies pagination with cursor, adding minimal extra meaning.

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 explicitly states 'List HIP-4 outcome markets aggregated across both sides' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling get_hip4_outcome by noting this tool omits aggregated_oi.

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?

Provides clear context: optional filtering by settlement status, WebSocket event for updates, and direction to get_hip4_outcome for OI. However, no explicit when-not statements or comparisons to other siblings.

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