get_city

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds valuable behavioral context: it is free, requires no wallet or API key, and it discloses what the response includes (current target market day and Polymarket market URL). This covers access requirements and expected output, though it does not mention rate limits or error handling.

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 that front-loads the core action and resource, then adds key details. Every phrase earns its place, with no redundant information.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context about the return contents ('current target market day' and 'Polymarket market URL'). It does not cover failure modes, but the simplicity and clear purpose make it nearly complete.

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?

The schema already covers the 'slug' parameter with a description, but the tool description adds context that slugs come from 'get_cities', which helps the agent understand where the value originates. This goes beyond the schema's static type/example.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'one Isocast city by slug', and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_cities' by emphasizing 'one' and 'by slug'. This makes its purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool (when you have a slug for a single city) but does not explicitly mention alternatives like 'get_cities' for listing. It provides a usage prerequisite ('by slug') but lacks explicit 'vs alternative' guidance.

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