polymarket_market_snapshot

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true (dynamic data). The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Gamma's cached price can lag the live book — `live_midpoint` is the freshest value,' which warns about potential staleness. No contradictions with 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 three sentences: a clear headline, a process explanation, and input guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or 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 the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no required) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers input behavior, caching notes, and the resolution process. It is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that `slug` is preferred and `query` is free-text for searching, and it will pick the most liquid match. This adds meaning beyond the schema but could be more specific about format or constraints.

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 provides 'Live odds for one market in a single call' and positions itself as 'the recommended starting point.' It explains the mechanism (resolves market by slug or free text, fetches CLOB midpoint) and differentiates from siblings by being a single-call solution.

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 advises to 'Provide a slug (preferred) or a free-text query' and mentions that Gamma's cached price can lag. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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