List Polymarket markets (Gamma)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds value by noting that clobTokenIds are returned, which is a behavioral hint for chaining tools, but does not disclose other behaviors beyond 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?

Two concise sentences efficiently convey purpose and a usage hint. Information is front-loaded but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for clarity).

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?

While annotations cover safety, the description omits details on pagination (offset, limit), ordering, and output format. For a listing tool with no output schema, more contextual information would be beneficial to guide correct invocation.

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 has 7 parameters with only 29% description coverage. The description mentions 'Filter by active/closed' corresponding to these boolean parameters, but provides no elaboration on slug, limit, order, offset, or ascending. Given low schema coverage, the description insufficiently compensates.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists markets with specific metadata (question, outcomes, prices, volume, liquidity, clobTokenIds) and mentions filtering by active/closed. This distinctively differentiates it from sibling tools like polymarket_get_market or polymarket_get_event.

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?

Description advises using clobTokenIds with price history/order book tools, providing actionable guidance on integrating with downstream tools. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with alternatives, though the sibling names imply distinct use cases.

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