Get Market Price

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral details beyond what is already in structured data. For example, it does not explain that the tool returns a single price or whether it requires specific permissions.

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?

Extremely short (7 words) but lacks sufficient detail. While front-loaded, the description is too terse to be useful. It does not earn its place as a complete explanation.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 param, has output schema) and annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'midpoint price' means, how it relates to other price tools, or the format of the output. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of context in the description.

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 (token_id). The description mentions 'midpoint price' but does not add semantic context for token_id beyond the schema's description. Baseline 3 applies; no extra value.

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 'Get midpoint price for a prediction market token' clearly states the action (get) and resource (midpoint price). However, 'midpoint' is ambiguous (could be mid price from orderbook or other). It does not differentiate from sibling tools like polymarket.market.orderbook or polymarket.market.detail which might also provide price data.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as polymarket.market.orderbook, polymarket.market.history, or polymarket.market.detail. The description lacks context for tool selection.

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