blockrun_polymarket_read

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and destructiveHint false, and the description reinforces them with concrete commitments: 'This action never accepts confirm and never signs or submits an order.' It also discloses the data sources, CLOB book and Data API, and clarifies that previews are live but non-mutating.

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, bulleted by action, and front-loaded with the all-important safety statement. Every sentence adds functional value, and sibling routing is compressed into one clear sentence.

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, but the action bullets summarize what each call returns: Holdings, value, PnL, and redeemable status; open CLOB orders; and live order previews. Combined with a l00% schema-described parameters, the description gives the agent enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, but the description adds critical combination logic beyond the schema: preview requires side plus token_id or condition_id+outcome, market buys use amount_usd, limit orders use price+size, and condition_id filters orders. These cross-parameter requirements are not inferable from the individual parameter descriptions alone.

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 opening line specifies a read-only verb and resource with a clear safety boundary: 'Read or preview Polymarket state without signing or changing anything.' The action list explicitly names positions, orders, and preview, making the tool's scope unambiguous and distinct from the funds-affecting sibling.

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 final sentence gives explicit routing guidance: 'Use blockrun_polymarket only for setup and funds-affecting operations' and enumerates confirmed buy/sell, cancel, redeem, fund, or withdraw. This directly tells the agent when to use this tool versus its sibling.

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