polymarket_events_similar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions results are 'normalized similar events' and 'credential-free', but does not explain how similarity is determined, whether inputs are required, or any potential side effects or limitations.

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 with no unnecessary words. The purpose is front-loaded and the source is specified. Every sentence adds value.

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 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the relationship between parameters (e.g., which are typically used together) or the notion of similarity, leaving the agent to infer proper usage.

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% and each parameter has a basic description, but the tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema. The description's note about 'returns normalized similar events' is more about output than input semantics.

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 finds similar Polymarket events, names the data source ('Gamma events/similar JSON'), and the name 'similar' distinguishes it from other Polymarket tools like polymarket_events 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?

The description implies usage when similar events are needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like polymarket_events or polymarket_search. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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