Get the current Polymarket CLOB buy or sell price for a token ID. Provide token_id and side to retrieve the public price.
Get Polymarket token price. Returns the public CLOB buy or sell price for one Polymarket token id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| side | No | Order side used for the CLOB price | |
| token_id | Yes | Polymarket CLOB token id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / side / enumAdded value: +[
+ "buy",
+ "sell"
+]v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the price is public and from the CLOB, indicating a read-only operation, but it does not mention side optionality behavior, error cases, or rate limits. This is adequate for a simple read tool but leaves some behavioral details to inference.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the return value. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.
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?
The tool is simple (two parameters, no output schema) and the schema covers parameter semantics. The description clearly states the return value and scope, sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. Minor gap: it does not explain behavior when the optional 'side' is omitted, but the schema description already covers the parameter meaning.
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%, so the schema already documents token_id and side with descriptions. The description adds slight context ('buy or sell price', 'one Polymarket token id') but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline of 3.
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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get Polymarket token price') and specifies exactly what is returned: the public CLOB buy or sell price for one token id. This differentiates it from siblings like midpoint, orderbook, spread, and price history by focusing on the single-token buy/sell price.
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 its use case: retrieve the current CLOB buy/sell price for a single token. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as token_midpoint, token_orderbook, or token_price_history, nor does it mention any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.