polymarket-trader-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses return format ('risk score with specific warnings') and parameter requirement ('No parameters needed'), but omits data source (current portfolio?), side effects, auth requirements, or computational cost.

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 with zero waste. First sentence front-loads action + 4 specific dimensions. Second sentence covers return value and parameter state. Every clause earns its place.

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?

Well-covered for a zero-parameter tool. Mentions return type (risk score with warnings) compensating for missing output schema. Credible completeness given narrow scope, though explicitly stating it reads live portfolio data would strengthen further.

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?

Zero parameters present; baseline 4 applies. Description efficiently confirms 'No parameters needed', validating the empty schema without redundancy.

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?

Specific verb 'Assess' with clear resource 'portfolio risk'. Uniquely distinguishes from siblings (analyze_opportunity, check_exits, optimize_portfolio) by enumerating 4 exact dimensions: position concentration, market diversification, stop-loss/take-profit coverage, and daily budget utilization.

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?

Lists 4 assessed dimensions which implies usage context, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to siblings like 'check_exits' (which overlaps with stop-loss coverage) or 'optimize_portfolio'. No prerequisites or alternatives named.

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