estimate_shares_out

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('estimate'), but does not explicitly state no side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a safe and informed agent 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 a single sentence with a follow-up instruction, containing no fluff. It is front-loaded with the purpose.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks details about output format, what 'shares' means, and how estimation works, requiring prior system knowledge.

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%, and the description adds meaning only for amount_usdb by linking it to 'bet_amount' in the usage flow. The parameters market and outcome remain undefined beyond their names.

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 estimates shares for a USDB bet, with a specific verb and resource. It also provides a usage flow involving get_my_shares and get_potential_payout, distinguishing it from actual betting tools.

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 gives explicit instructions: add result to existing shares, then pass to get_potential_payout. This guides when and how to use the tool, though it does not exclude alternatives or state when not to use it.

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