traders.positions

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry behavioral burden. It states 'current open positions' (read operation) and 'Pro feature' (subscription requirement). Does not detail rate limits, data freshness, or behavior on no positions. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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: first states action and resource, second adds specifics and use case. No fluff, every sentence adds value. Efficient and clear.

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?

Tool is simple (2 params, no output schema). Description covers input (address, limit) and output (market name, outcome, size, current price). Lacks details on pagination or empty results, but overall sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context ('by their wallet address') and output fields, but the schema already documents the parameters well. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Describes a clear verb (View) and resource (another trader's open positions on Polymarket), and lists the fields shown (market name, outcome, size, current price). Distinguishes from sibling tools like positions.list (own positions) and traders.analyze.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'Useful for due diligence before copy trading.' Implies when to use this tool. No direct exclusions or alternative recommendations, but the context is clear.

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