kalshi_historical_trades

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'credential-free' (no auth) and 'historical', but omits pagination details, rate limits, data freshness, or that it returns trades (not aggregates). Minimal disclosure.

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?

Two concise sentences front-loading the tool's name and core purpose. No wasted words, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing key traits).

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 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description lacks details on return format, pagination behavior, and parameter usage, making it insufficient for effective use without external knowledge.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds no parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides; it does not explain cursor, limit, or timestamp filters.

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 explicitly states it returns 'normalized older Kalshi trades from credential-free historical market-data JSON', specifying the resource (historical trades) and distinguishing it from current trade tools like kalshi_trades.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., kalshi_trades for current trades, kalshi_market_history for market-level history). The description only implies historical context but lacks explicit direction.

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