Fetch a Polymarket CLOB market by condition ID to retrieve tokens, reward settings, order acceptance state, tags, and fees in one JSON row.
Get Polymarket CLOB market. Returns one public CLOB market detail row by market condition id, including tokens, reward settings, order acceptance state, tags, and fees.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| condition_id | Yes | Polymarket market condition id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error conditions. For a read operation, this is minimal but insufficient for transparency about what happens on invalid condition IDs or data availability.
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 two sentences: the first clearly states the action and resource, the second lists returned fields. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the essential verb and object. No redundancy or filler.
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?
For a simple retrieval tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It specifies input (condition id) and output contents (detail row with specific fields). Could mention that it returns a single row or that it might be used for CLOB-specific markets, but overall adequate.
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 coverage is 100% with one parameter well-described as 'Polymarket market condition id'. The description adds no extra semantic beyond the schema, achieving the baseline for high coverage. No enums or additional constraints are needed.
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 action ('Get Polymarket CLOB market') and the resource ('CLOB market detail row'), with the key identifier 'market condition id'. It lists the included fields (tokens, reward settings, etc.), making the purpose specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'polymarket_market_detail', which could cause confusion.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like polymarket_market_detail, polymarket_events, or other CLOB-related tools. The description lacks context for appropriate selection or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.