polymarket_price

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that no auth is needed and specifies the return shape as {price}, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, but the final sentence 'Also answers this: kalshi_orderbook' is unclear and does not contribute meaningful structure, slightly detracting from overall conciseness.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return format, and auth. However, it lacks clear guidance on how this tool relates to similar siblings, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both token_id and side clearly documented. The description's phrase 'one outcome token on one side of the book' adds minimal additional meaning, so the baseline of 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 the tool returns the best price for one outcome token on one side of the book, distinguishing it from other Polymarket price tools. However, the line 'Also answers this: kalshi_orderbook' introduces ambiguity about the tool's exact scope, so it isn't a perfect 5.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative-tool guidance is provided. The reference to kalshi_orderbook is vague and does not clarify when to prefer this tool over sibling tools like polymarket_book or polymarket_midpoint.

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