outcomes_get_market

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only includes '[L:READ]' which may hint at read-only behavior but is not explicitly stated. There is no disclosure of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or any behavioral traits.

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 very short, but the cryptic tags and Chinese instruction reduce clarity. Conciseness should not come at the expense of informativeness.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to describe what data is returned, error conditions, or any other contextual details that would help an agent understand the tool's usage and output.

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% with one parameter 'marketId' described in Chinese. The description does not add any further meaning or context beyond what is in the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 uses cryptic tags like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[预测]' without clear meaning. The tool name 'outcomes_get_market' suggests getting a market, but the description does not explicitly state the function or distinguish it from siblings like 'outcomes_get_event' or 'outcomes_list_markets'.

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 instructs to call 'agent_catalog' first, indicating a prerequisite, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or what scenarios it is best suited for.

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