polymarket_market

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Auth: none needed' and the return object shape, which provide some context, but there is no mention of error handling, latency, or what happens for invalid ids.

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 mostly concise and front-loaded, with the purpose in the first sentence and a compact return shape listing. However, the final 'Also answers this: kalshi_market.' sentence is ambiguous and could mislead, preventing a perfect score.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a reasonable amount of context: it lists the return fields inline, notes no auth required, and specifies the id source indirectly. It lacks explanation of the events array or potential missing fields, but overall it is adequate.

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 the 'id' parameter already has a rich description (Gamma market id from polymarket_markets, required, URL path part). The tool description merely repeats 'by Gamma id' without adding new parameter syntax or format details, so it does not go beyond the schema.

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 that this tool retrieves a single market's full detail by Gamma id, listing key fields like question, outcomes, prices, and CLOB token ids. It distinguishes from the sibling 'polymarket_markets' (plural) by the 'One market' phrasing, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 usage is implied: when you have a Gamma id and need full market detail. However, there are no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions, and the cryptic 'Also answers this: kalshi_market.' line adds confusion rather than clear guidance.

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