polymarket_leaderboard

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that the API is credential-free, returns normalized rows, and explicitly lists enum values for window and sort_by. However, it does not mention rate limits or pagination behavior, but for a simple read-only tool this is adequate.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words: first states purpose, second adds source/processing context, third lists parameter specifics. Highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 listing tool with 3 basic parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, source, processing (normalized), and parameter values. It does not describe the exact return fields, but 'normalized trader leaderboard rows' is reasonably informative.

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 schema descriptions are minimal ('Leaderboard sort', 'Leaderboard time window'), but the description adds concrete enum values ('1d', '7d', '30d', 'all' for window; 'profit', 'volume' for sort_by), which is valuable beyond schema. It also clarifies limit defaults and max.

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 'List Polymarket leaderboard rows' and specifies the source (credential-free Data API). Among sibling tools like polymarket_markets, polymarket_events, etc., this is uniquely for the leaderboard, setting clear differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions, exclusions, or comparisons to other Polymarket tools, leaving the agent without decision support.

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