getPredictionEventDetail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond annotations: slug takes priority over eventId, and hasMoreMarkets controls inclusion of related 'more-markets' sub-events. No contradiction exists.

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 front-loaded and begins with a clear summary, but it is redundant: the agent hint and the preceding paragraph repeat the same 'call before trading' and 'prefer slug' guidance multiple times. It could be tightened to one clear paragraph without losing information.

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 covers the returned data, the parameter behavior, and the intended call context, which is good given there is no output schema. However, with all parameters listed as optional, it leaves ambiguous whether at least one of slug or eventId must be supplied, and it does not describe error or fallback behavior. This is a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It adds value by explaining slug as human-readable and preferred, eventId as the fallback, and hasMoreMarkets as the flag for related sub-events. However, it does not explicitly state what happens when neither slug nor eventId is provided.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get detailed information about a prediction event') and enumerates the returned data: associated markets, outcome tokens, current prices, and trading statistics. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from getPredictionMarketList, which eliminates ambiguity among a large sibling list.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: call before buy/sell orders, prefer slug over eventId because it is more stable, set hasMoreMarkets=true to include related sub-events, and do NOT use getPredictionMarketList for individual event details. This is strong routing and selection guidance.

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