polymarket-crypto-updown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Returns binary up/down markets' and 'current market consensus' but does not disclose data freshness, API dependency, or whether it's read-only. For a simple data retrieval tool, this is a minor gap.

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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the tool's core purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 exists, so the description must explain the return structure. It vaguely states 'binary up/down markets' and 'current market consensus' but omits details like the specific fields returned (e.g., asset, direction, probability, volume). This leaves the agent uncertain about the response format.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond restating the asset filter and default limit. It does not provide additional context like format or example values, but the schema already serves well.

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 tool returns binary up/down prediction markets for major crypto assets, distinguishing it from broader siblings like 'prediction-markets' or 'polymarket-intel' by focusing specifically on crypto price direction.

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 use cases ('directional sentiment, agent decision context, signal feeds') and mentions filtering by asset symbol, but does not explicitly exclude scenarios or recommend alternatives among the many sibling prediction-market tools.

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