getPredictionSideMarketList

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the tool as a query (read) operation with no side effects. It explains the concept of side markets but does not detail response format or constraints. For a simple query tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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 five sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes examples and a hint without unnecessary fluff. Could be slightly more concise, but each sentence adds value.

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 query tool with no output schema, the description explains the purpose and parameter mapping. However, it does not describe the expected output structure (e.g., fields in the market list). While the tool name hints at the return, additional detail would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must add parameter meaning. It provides a crucial mapping: 'eventType=1 refers to FIFA_2026'. This is valuable beyond the schema's enum constraint. However, it does not describe the parameter's purpose beyond that.

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 verb 'Query' and the resource 'list of side/related markets'. It distinguishes from siblings like getPredictionMatchList by specifying that this tool returns additional markets beyond match outcomes, with concrete examples (top scorer, group winners).

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 provides clear context: 'discover additional trading opportunities beyond match outcome predictions'. It specifies that eventType=1 refers to FIFA_2026. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the use case is well stated.

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