kalshi_events

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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds value by explaining the return structure (cursor, events, milestones), pagination behavior, auth requirement, and a worked example. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently packs return format, pagination, example, and auth into four short sentences. Every sentence contributes information without redundancy.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential return fields and an example, making it largely self-contained. Minor missing details like sort order or the meaning of 'milestones' would improve completeness but are not critical for selecting or invoking the tool.

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?

All five parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds explanatory context by mapping 'filter by series or status' to the relevant parameters, and the example demonstrates how to use `limit` and `status` together. This is above baseline.

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 it is an 'Event catalogue' with an explicit definition of what an event is ('an event groups related markets'). It specifies the filterable dimensions (series, status) and mentions pagination, distinguishing it from singular tools like kalshi_event.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use it: as a catalogue for browsing/filtering events by series or status. Includes a concrete example (first page of open events) that demonstrates a use case. Does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the purpose is unambiguous enough that an agent can infer it from the sibling list.

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