get_pools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read operation ('Get') and lists output fields, but does not explicitly state it is read-only, mention authentication needs, or disclose any rate limits or side effects.

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: first states purpose and output, second gives usage guidance. No redundant information, front-loaded effectively.

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?

The description lists the specific data returned (win probabilities, pool shares, etc.), which compensates for the lack of output schema. It does not mention sorting or pagination, but given no parameters and the simplicity of the tool, it is adequately complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the output contents, even though there is no output schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'Get all currently open pools' and lists the specific data fields returned (win probabilities, pool shares, prices, etc.). This verb+resource structure distinguishes it from siblings like get_pool_history (historical data) and get_leaderboard (rankings).

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 says 'Use this to decide which pools to enter,' providing clear context for when to invoke. However, it does not mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like get_pool_history.

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