polymarket_get_market_holders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that limit is capped at 20 by the API, which is useful, but otherwise provides no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, data freshness). Adequate but minimal beyond annotations.

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 a single sentence followed by a clear parameter list. No redundant information, all sentences add value. 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?

For a simple read-only tool with two parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the core functionality and parameter details. It does not explain the output structure, but the output schema presumably does. Slightly incomplete regarding edge cases or behavior when API returns errors.

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% schema description coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: condition_id as 'on-chain condition id' and its mapping to the Data API's market param, and limit as 'Top-N holders per token, capped at 20.' This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema types.

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 'Top holders per outcome token for a market,' specifying the resource (holders) and action (retrieve top ones). It distinguishes from sibling tools like polymarket_get_order_book and polymarket_get_market by focusing on holders per outcome token.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists parameters but does not explain scenarios or exclusions. Given multiple related tools, explicit usage direction is absent.

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