market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description indicates it 'resolves' a market, which might imply a read operation, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or non-destructive. It adds context about expired markets but lacks information on auth needs or rate limits.

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, each serving a distinct purpose: the first explains the action and scope, the second details the output and usage. There is zero wasted text, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 only one parameter and an output schema exists (though not shown), the description comprehensively covers the output fields (condition_id, token ids, close time, winner) and provides integration guidance with sibling tools. It is fully sufficient for the agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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?

The single parameter 'slug' has 0% schema description coverage, but the description explains it is a 'gamma slug' that works for any category, including expired short-lived markets. This adds meaning beyond the schema's title 'Slug', helping the agent understand the parameter's nature and scope.

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 tool resolves a Polymarket market by gamma slug, works for any category including expired short-lived markets. It specifies the returned data: condition_id, outcome names mapped to token ids, close time, and settled winner. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'find_markets' (search) and 'event' (event-level data).

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 the agent to use the returned token ids with 'book' and trading tools, providing clear post-invocation guidance. It does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'find_markets' or 'event', but the context of resolving by slug is implied.

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