Polymarket Agent Mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes key traits: batch execution with a max of 10 orders, per-order success/failure results, and optional price for limit orders. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, transaction costs, or error handling, which are important for a financial trading tool.

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 with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by key details in a second sentence. Every sentence earns its place by conveying essential information without 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 the complexity of a batch trading tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic operation and parameters but lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, or what the return values (e.g., 'per-order results') specifically entail, which are crucial for safe usage.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the 'orders' parameter and its nested properties. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'max 10 orders' (implied in schema) and 'optional price' (stated in schema), but doesn't provide additional context like examples or edge cases.

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 specific action ('Execute multiple buy/sell orders in a single call') with the resource ('orders'), distinguishes it from siblings like orders.buy and orders.sell by emphasizing batch execution, and specifies the maximum limit of 10 orders.

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 implies usage context by mentioning 'multiple buy/sell orders in a single call' and the max 10 orders, which suggests it's for bulk operations. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like orders.buy or orders.sell for single orders, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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