Prediction market screener

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is paid ($0.008 USDC per call via x402 on Base, automatic payment), which is critical behavioral info. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or mention other behavior like rate limits.

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 sentences: first explains the function concisely, second provides essential cost info. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but for a list tool the result format is somewhat implied. Could mention default limit or pagination behavior, but the description covers key aspects for basic usage.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing example tags (politics, crypto, sports) and order values (volume, liquidity, newest), enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 title 'Prediction market screener' and description 'Browse active prediction markets, optionally filtered by tag and ordered by volume/liquidity' clearly state the verb (browse), resource (prediction markets), and scope (optionally filtered and ordered), distinguishing it from siblings like prediction_history or prediction_search.

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 includes cost details but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like prediction_search or prediction_history. It implies browsing use case but lacks explicit when-not or alternatives guidance.

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