get_conditions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Adds valuable domain context ('on-chain', 'resolution status') but omits behavioral details like pagination behavior, data freshness, or return structure that agents need when annotations are absent.

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 efficient sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource. Briefness appropriate for simple list operation, though content could be redistributed to cover the missing parameter documentation.

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?

Adequate for a simple 2-parameter listing tool. Explains the domain-specific term 'conditions' effectively, but gaps remain around the undocumented 'first' parameter andcomparison to numerous sibling market tools.

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 only 50% (parameter 'first' undocumented). Description mentions 'resolution status' conceptually aligning with the 'resolved' parameter, but completely fails to document the 'first' parameter's purpose (likely pagination limit), providing no compensation for schema gaps.

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?

Clear verb ('Get') and resource ('conditions') with helpful parenthetical clarifying domain terminology ('markets that have been prepared on-chain'). However, lacks explicit differentiation from siblings like 'search_markets' or 'get_market_lifecycle'.

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?

States utility ('Useful for finding resolved/unresolved markets') implying when to use, but provides no explicit comparison to alternative tools or exclusion criteria (e.g., when to prefer search_markets instead).

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