get_builder_activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses data scope (recent fills, aggregate totals) and the V2-only limitation. However, it does not mention pagination, default limit, or return format beyond the totals, leaving minor gaps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core functionality and output, followed by a concise usage prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant phrasing.

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 two-parameter read tool, the description sufficiently explains purpose, input source, and scope. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit mention of 'recent fills' and 'aggregate totals.' Minor omission is the precise definition of 'recent' (e.g., time range).

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces that builderId comes from get_builder_leaderboard, but the schema already states this. No additional parameter semantics are provided beyond what the schema offers.

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 the tool returns recent fills and aggregate totals for a specific Polymarket CLOB V2 builder code. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_recent_activity by specifying builder code and V2-era scope, and by referencing get_builder_leaderboard.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call get_builder_leaderboard first to obtain a builderId, providing a concrete usage workflow. The 'V2-era only' constraint gives an exclusion and contextualizes when the tool is applicable.

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