polymarket_top_whales

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does disclose two useful behavioral facts beyond the schema: the data is 'pre-sanitized with CanaryGuard' and costs 0.01 USDC on Base. It still omits return shape, rate/limit behavior, and whether it is a pure read.

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 tightly packed sentences with no filler; the core capability is front-loaded before the sanitization and pricing notes. Slightly jargon-dense but efficient.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema the description is workable, but it leaves the return format, the meaning of 'CanaryGuard', and the overlap with the sibling whale-orderflow tool unaddressed, which are the details an agent needs to pick and use it 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% and the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema ('Max whales to analyze'). The description adds no syntax, bounds, or meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete data product: Polymarket whale orderbook imbalances and CLOB skew, with an explicit temporal scope ('right now'). However, it never distinguishes itself from the near-identical sibling alpha_polymarket_whale_orderflow, leaving the agent to guess which whale-flow tool to pick.

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?

Only 'right now' implies real-time use; there is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to the overlapping sibling tools. Given two whale-orderflow siblings exist, the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.

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