get_gamma_market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieve' plus the enumerated metadata (question, outcomes, CLOB token IDs, condition ID, volume, resolution params) makes clear this is a non-mutating read and tells the agent what data comes back. It omits auth requirements, error behavior for invalid slugs, and rate limits.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, which is good, but 'detailed, comprehensive' is redundant padding and 'natively' adds little. The Args block usefully documents the parameter but is somewhat verbose for a single argument.

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 one required string parameter, an existing output schema (so return values need not be spelled out), and read-only semantics, the definition covers what the agent needs to invoke correctly. The main missing piece is routing guidance relative to the many sibling market/event tools.

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, and it does: it explains that the argument is the Gamma market mapping ID (numeric string) or a URL-friendly slug, which the bare schema never says. Minor gap is that it doesn't note format constraints or invalid-input behavior.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (a single Polymarket market) and names the API surface (Gamma API), which implicitly distinguishes it from the CLOB-family siblings like get_clob_market. It does not explicitly name the sibling alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'a single, specific market' implies this is for one known market rather than list/search, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g. search_markets, get_event, get_clob_market). The agent must infer routing.

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