analysis.opportunity

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It correctly states it is read-only and does not place trades, but omits details such as data freshness, rate limits, or behavior with insufficient data.

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 long, with the first sentence delivering the core purpose and the second clarifying safety. No extraneous information is present.

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 simple parameter set and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and safety. However, it could be slightly more detailed about the return value (e.g., score with reasoning).

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 100% for the single parameter 'condition_id'. The tool description adds context that it is a Polymarket market condition ID, but does not provide additional semantic value beyond the schema description.

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 it generates a BUY/SELL/HOLD recommendation for a Polymarket market, specifying the factors analyzed (price, spread, trend, liquidity). This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like analysis.arbitrage or analysis.compare.

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 implicitly indicates use for analysis by stating it is 'read-only' and does not place trades. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., analysis.price_history for historical data) or when not to use it.

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