Prediction market detail

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. Discloses paid nature and cost ($0.008 per call, x402 on Base), indicating read-only financial transaction. No mention of destructive actions or authentication beyond wallet, but adequate for a simple read tool.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second states cost. Front-loaded with essential info, no waste.

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 simple structure (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), description covers purpose and cost. Could mention output type or integration with sibling tools, but sufficient for a basic detail endpoint.

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 coverage is 100% (slug). Description does not add meaning beyond 'Market slug (from screener or search)', which duplicates schema description. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states 'Detail and current implied forecast for one prediction market', specifying verb (get detail/forecast) and resource (one prediction market), distinguishing it from sibling tools like prediction_markets (list) and prediction_history (historical).

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?

Implies usage for a single market (from screener or search), but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. Provides cost context but no when-not or exclusion criteria.

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