kalshi_exchange_schedule

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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by specifying the return structure 'Returns: {schedule:{standard_hours, maintenance_windows}}' and explicitly stating no authentication is needed. This provides output shape and auth context not covered by the readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, or idempotentHint 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 exceptionally concise, with just two lines of core content plus return type and auth. Every sentence is meaningful and front-loaded, with no redundancy or irrelevant details.

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 no-parameter, read-only tool, the description provides the essential return structure and clarifies the schedule contents (standard hours, maintenance windows). It does not elaborate on timezone, date ranges, or interpretation details, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema trivially covers all parameters. According to the rubric, zero params earns a baseline of 4. The description correctly omits parameter details, and there is no need for additional param explanation.

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 the resource and content: 'Standard trading hours + maintenance windows.' It conveys what the tool returns, but lacks an explicit action verb like 'get' and does not differentiate from sibling tools such as kalshi_exchange_status or kalshi_exchange_announcements. Thus it is clear but not distinguishing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention use cases like 'when you need trading hours' or compare with kalshi_exchange_status. The only additional note, 'Auth: none needed,' relates to authentication rather than usage context.

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