polymarket_price

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Returns: {price}' without explaining whether the price is the best bid/ask, if it's live or cached, or any authentication or rate-limit implications. This lacks sufficient detail for safe invocation.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no excess verbiage, and front-loaded information. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making the tool less usable.

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 the tool has two parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many similar sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It lacks return structure details (e.g., data type, example), error scenarios, and relationship to other polymarket tools, hindering 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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It adds that token_id identifies the token and side indicates the side of the book, but does not specify valid values for side (e.g., 'buy'/'sell' or 'yes'/'no'), leaving ambiguity. No enum or constraints are documented.

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 retrieves the best price for one outcome token on one side of the book, specifying the resource (price) and scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like polymarket_book or polymarket_midpoint, which also deal with pricing.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as polymarket_book (full order book) or polymarket_spread. The description omits context about preferred use cases, prerequisites, or situations where this tool is and isn't appropriate.

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