Get Polymarket trader activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly declares the tool as 'Public, read-only' and states it uses 'on-chain/public data', indicating no authentication or side effects. It doesn't mention rate limits or data freshness, but these are minor omissions.

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 efficiently cover purpose, scope, use cases, and access requirements. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place. Front-loaded with the core function.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, access, and use cases. It doesn't mention pagination or response format, but the schema parameters (limit, offset) imply pagination, and output format is not required. Minor gap, but overall sufficient.

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 all parameters. The description adds some context about views but essentially repeats the schema's enum values. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't provide significant extra semantic value beyond the schema.

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 provides a 'Public, read-only look at any wallet's Polymarket footprint' with specific views (positions, activity, value). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_market and get_orderbook, which focus on market data, not trader activity.

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 explicitly suggests use cases ('whale-watching and copy-research') and access requirements ('No credentials needed'). While it doesn't mention when not to use it, the context is clear and sufficient given sibling tool focus.

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