clob_health_check

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the success return value ('OK') and the two conditions tested, which is useful. It omits failure behavior (throws vs returns an error status), auth requirements, and timeout characteristics — modest gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 short sentences, the purpose front-loaded and the return value second. No filler or restatement of the name.

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?

An output schema exists, so return formatting need not be explained, and the description covers what is checked. The only remaining gap is failure-mode behavior (error vs negative result), which an agent would benefit from knowing before relying on it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline of 4 applies.

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 ('Check') and resource ('Polymarket Central Limit Order Book (CLOB) API server') with the condition being tested ('reachable and operational'). This is unambiguously distinct from every sibling tool, all of which fetch market data rather than probe server liveness.

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 purpose implies usage (pre-flight check, connectivity troubleshooting) but never states when to call it, e.g. before placing orders or after a failed request. No alternatives or exclusions are named, though none are really needed for a liveness probe.

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