get_polymarket_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states it lists events, without disclosing read-only nature, error handling, rate limits, or behavior when no events match. The minimal description fails to provide sufficient behavioral context.

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 short sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and a usage hint. No fluff or unnecessary detail.

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 list tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details about the return format (e.g., what fields each event object contains). This leaves the agent uncertain about what to expect from the response.

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 describes both parameters. The description's mention of 'browsing by category like politics, sports, crypto' adds minimal value beyond the schema's example values. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as it does not contradict but also does not significantly augment.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('Polymarket events (groupings of related markets)'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_polymarket_market (individual market) and search_polymarket (search) by emphasizing categorization.

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 says 'Good for browsing by category' which implies when to use, but it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use. No direct comparison with sibling tools is provided.

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