Polymarket Agent Mcp

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 discloses the tool's behavior as a read operation ('Get') and specifies the dashboard content, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or response format. This is adequate but has gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 sentences: the first front-loads the purpose and components, the second provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like response format or error handling, which could be helpful for a dashboard tool. It's mostly complete but has minor gaps.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by explicitly stating 'No parameters needed,' which clarifies usage beyond the schema. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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 'Get' and specifies the resource as 'a comprehensive dashboard' with detailed components: daily budget usage, total P&L, recent trades, watchlist status, and monitor state. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on a holistic overview rather than specific analyses or configurations.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this for a quick overview of your trading activity,' providing clear context for when to use it. It distinguishes from siblings by implying alternatives like detailed analysis tools (e.g., analysis.*) or specific config tools (e.g., config.set) for more targeted tasks.

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