limitless-markets

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists return fields and mentions cost and authentication ($0.006/call, no API key), but lacks explicit statements about rate limits, error behavior, or read-only nature. It is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Three sentences efficiently cover purpose, scope, and output details. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description lists key return fields (title, implied yes/no prices, expiration, volume, categories, slug). It explains coverage and cost. Missing only explicit error handling or pagination details, which schema partially covers.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds overall context about market types but does not enhance individual parameter meaning beyond the schema. No deduction or bonus warranted.

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 'Returns active prediction markets from Limitless Exchange with current Yes/No probabilities' and specifies coverage of short-duration crypto markets (5-min, 15-min BTC/ETH direction) along with longer-term markets. This distinguishes it from sibling prediction market tools like polymarket-* and prediction-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 provides clear context for when to use this tool, highlighting its focus on Limitless Exchange and short-duration crypto markets. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it, which would be needed for a 5.

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