Get one market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a retrieval operation and specifies what the response contains: outcome tokens, resolution status, and winning outcome. This is sufficient for a simple read-only market-detail 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: one states what the tool returns, the other states when to use it. No repetition, no filler, and useful context is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers the important contents and a concrete downstream use. It could also mention using search_markets when the slug is unknown, but that is not essential because the tool's scope is otherwise well specified.

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 schema already fully describes id_or_slug with an example, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the clarification 'or id', which is helpful but not substantial 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 description clearly states the specific verb and resource: getting full detail for a single market by slug or id. It also enumerates what is included, so it is easy to distinguish from search_markets and the other sibling tools.

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 an explicit use case: call this tool to get token ids before using token-level tools. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to search_markets for discovering a slug, but the simple single-market context makes the intended usage clear.

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