Match market prices

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

The annotations already indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds meaningful context beyond the annotations by specifying the PRO plan requirement and detailing the output structure (bid, ask, mid, implied probability). This provides useful operational context without contradicting the 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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and output format, then adds the PRO requirement. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 a fully documented schema and an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the market type, the per-player probabilities, the pricing components, and the access requirement. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema already has 100% parameter coverage, describing match_id and limit with defaults and constraints. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond that, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns match-winner market prices with implied probability per player, bid, ask, and mid. This goes beyond a tautology and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_match and get_match_score, which focus on other match data.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving odds on a specific match, and the mention of 'Requires the PRO plan' is a useful precondition. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_match or get_upcoming_matches, nor does it mention exclusions or when not to use it.

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