Get full details for a specific Polymarket event by slug, with no token, wallet, or account needed.
Get Polymarket event detail. Returns one Polymarket event. This endpoint does not require a Polymarket user token, wallet signature, cookies, or personal account authentication.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Polymarket event slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does add real value by disclosing that no user token, wallet signature, cookies, or account auth are required. That is meaningful for an agent planning the call. It stops short of describing return payload, rate limits, or error behavior.
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?
Short and front-loaded, but the second sentence ('Returns one Polymarket event') is redundant with the first, wasting one of only three sentences. The valuable auth note comes last, when it could be tightened.
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 one-param lookup tool, the description covers the essentials and the auth note is helpful. But with no output schema and many polymarket siblings, it is missing what the response contains and why to choose this over adjacent event/market 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?
The single parameter is fully documented in the schema ('Polymarket event slug', 100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about slug format, source, or how to obtain one, so it neither compensates nor detracts.
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+resource ('Get Polymarket event detail'), so the agent knows it fetches a single event. However, the second sentence ('Returns one Polymarket event') only restates the first, and the description does not distinguish this from close siblings like polymarket_events, polymarket_market_detail, or polymarket_search.
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?
'Returns one Polymarket event' implies a single-item lookup, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions selecting this over polymarket_events or polymarket_market_detail, and no prerequisites described. The agent must infer usage entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.