Polymarket MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions using 'first clobTokenIds entry when available', hinting at data selection behavior, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, response format, or error handling. This is inadequate for a tool that performs analysis without output schema.

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 with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and including a practical example. However, the second sentence about 'first clobTokenIds entry' is somewhat cryptic and could be better integrated or explained.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter with high schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what the analysis returns, how results are structured, or any behavioral constraints, making it insufficient for effective tool use in this context.

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%, so the schema already documents the 'slug' parameter. The description adds minimal value by providing an example slug ('will-biden-win-2024'), which clarifies format but doesn't explain semantics beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 performs 'heuristic market analysis' using specific metrics (volume, liquidity, spread, time-to-close), which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'compare_markets' or 'get_market_details', which might offer similar analysis capabilities.

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 minimal guidance, only mentioning an example slug ('will-biden-win-2024') without explaining when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compare_markets' or 'get_market_details'. There's no context on prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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