latest_matched_news

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add one key behavior: only headlines with a confident market match are returned. However, it does not explain what 'confident' means, how results are ordered, how recent 'recent' is, or any pagination/rate-limit behavior. The core filtering trait is disclosed, but deeper behavioral details are absent.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core function, the second frames the user-facing value, and the third clarifies the filtering criterion. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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?

The description gives a functional overview and the output schema exists, but it omits essential operational details for a parameterized feed: how top_k and max_age_hours behave, what ordering is used, and how 'confident market match' is determined. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the parameter semantics gap leaves the definition incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the two parameters, top_k and max_age_hours. It does not mention either parameter or how they influence results. The phrase 'recent headlines' vaguely relates to max_age_hours, but no explicit mapping or semantic guidance is provided beyond the parameter names themselves.

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 identifies the tool as a live feed of recent headlines matched to Polymarket markets, with a specific perspective ('what does the news mean for the odds'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like match_news by being a continuous feed rather than a one-off matching operation, and the filtering rule ('only headlines with at least one confident market match') sharpens the scope.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: when you want a live, pre-matched view of news relative to market odds. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'live feed' framing plus sibling names like search_markets and match_news make the intended use reasonably evident.

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