find_markets

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies read-only behavior ('Discover') and explains the two operational modes. However, it does not explicitly declare non-destructiveness, auth requirements, or rate limits. For a search tool, the transparency is adequate but not fully explicit.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no superfluous words. Every 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?

Given the tool has an output schema (so return values are documented externally), the description covers the essential usage context: search modes, result contents, and linkage to the sibling 'market' tool. It is complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'query' parameter through the two modes, but does not mention the 'limit' parameter (its meaning or default). This partial explanation is helpful but incomplete.

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 uses a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('Polymarket markets of ANY kind'), and distinguishes two modes (with/without query). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'market' by mentioning the slug to pass to it.

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 tells when to use with query (full-text search) vs without (most active by volume). It references the sibling 'market' tool for subsequent steps but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives beyond that.

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