Polymarket Agent Mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the output format ('markdown table of watched wallets'), the data included ('alias, date added, and active/paused status'), and that it has 'No parameters'. However, it doesn't mention potential rate limits, pagination, or error conditions.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by usage guidelines and alternatives. Every sentence adds value: the first defines the tool, the second provides context, and the third clarifies related tools. No wasted words.

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 is largely complete: it explains purpose, usage, output format, and related tools. However, it lacks details on error handling or performance characteristics, which could be relevant for a list operation.

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 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description explicitly states 'No parameters', which adds clarity beyond the empty schema, confirming there are no hidden or optional inputs.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('show every wallet address') and resources ('copy-trading watchlist'), distinguishing it from siblings like watchlist.add or traders.discover by focusing on listing rather than managing or discovering.

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 provides when to use this tool: 'before calling monitor.start', 'after watchlist.rebalance to confirm removals', or 'to pick a target for traders.analyze, traders.positions, or traders.score'. Also mentions alternatives like watchlist.add for managing entries and traders.discover for finding new wallets.

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