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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context beyond that: pagination mechanics, limit default (25) and max (200), the accepted status values, and that with_milestones/with_nested_markets request extra upstream detail.

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?

Front-loads the core fetch action, then filters, then pagination, then sibling routing, in compact prose with no filler sentences.

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?

A read-only, open-world list/search tool with an output schema and full param coverage: the description supplies filters, pagination constraints, and disambiguation from the four related Kalshi tools. Nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 schema already documents all 9 parameters. The description echoes limit defaults, the status enum, and the two detail flags without adding format or syntax beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('normalized Kalshi event records from public market-data JSON'), plus the filterable dimensions. It distinguishes itself from siblings like kalshi_event and kalshi_event_history without needing the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Use kalshi_event for one event, kalshi_event_history for history, kalshi_markets for markets, or kalshi_event_metadata for metadata.' The condition-selecting alternative is named for each.

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