polymarket_public_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only, credential-free operation ('normalized wrapper around credential-free public JSON'). However, it does not disclose behavior like rate limits, caching, or what happens without filters. Partial disclosure.

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 very concise, two sentences. The first sentence is a fragment ('Polymarket fee types.') but still clear. No unnecessary words. Could be slightly improved with a complete sentence.

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 two optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain filter behavior, output format, or limitations. For a tool with filters, more context is needed for effective use.

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%; both parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. For example, it does not explain how 'active' or 'search' affect the results. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns fee type data from Polymarket Gamma. The verb 'returns' and the resource 'fee type data' are specific. However, the tool name 'polymarket_public_data' is broader and could cause confusion. It is not fully distinguished from sibling tools, though no other fee-specific tool exists.

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 on when to use this tool versus other Polymarket tools. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or alternative tools. The description only states what it does, not the context.

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