get_v2_top_traders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals critical behavior: the exclusion of exchange contracts and the fact that the V2 exchange's account row would otherwise skew data. It also specifies the V2-era block threshold. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it omits details like pagination or return format.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. The second sentence explains why to use it and the third sets a precise scope. No filler; each sentence contributes essential information for tool selection and invocation.

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 two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, and behavioral nuance. It lacks mention of pagination or return shape, but the tool's simplicity and the presence of a limit parameter make this acceptable. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% with descriptive parameter names and descriptions (limit and orderBy with enum). The description's 'by volume or trade count' aligns with the orderBy enum but adds no new syntax or format details beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already explains parameters effectively.

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 'Top real traders on Polymarket CLOB V2 by volume or trade count', specifying both the resource and the sorting metrics. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_top_traders' by explicitly limiting to V2-era and excluding exchange contracts, making its scope unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs when to use this tool: 'Use this rather than querying accounts directly', and explains why (the V2 exchange itself acts as taker and would outrank humans). This provides a clear alternative and a rationale, satisfying the when/why-not guidance requirement.

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