get_index

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so excellently. It discloses that the tool is free, read-only (poll target), rate-limited to 5/min, and requires no authentication. It also adds cadence and endpoint details, which are valuable behavioral traits beyond any structured data.

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 highly concise, packing purpose, usage, cadence, endpoint, and access constraints into two efficient sentences. Every element adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose before delivering operational details.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns, when to use it, how often to poll, the rate limit, and authentication requirements. No further context is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about the HTTP endpoint (GET /v1/index) and the purpose, but no parameter explanations are needed. It does not repeat schema info beyond what is already empty.

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 this tool returns the current Polymarket feed index and identifies its specific role as a polling target to detect new items. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_signal by framing the index as a preliminary check before paying for a signal.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: poll target to detect new items at ~10min cadence, before paying for a signal. It also provides operational constraints (FREE, rate-limited 5/min per IP, no auth) which inform usage decisions. This implies not for fetching the signal itself, giving clear context.

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