kalshi_markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying the return format (detailed fields list), pagination behavior via cursor, and that no auth is required. It also clarifies the catalog scope ('current quotes'), going beyond the 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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. The return block and example are useful but slightly lengthen the description. Each part earns its place, though the long field list could be considered verbose; however, it preempts output-schema ambiguity.

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?

The tool has 6 optional parameters, no output schema, but the description compensates by providing the exact return shape and an example request. It also covers auth and pagination. Missing are rate limits or edge cases, but given the read-only annotations and simplicity, this is adequate.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explicitly mentioning the filter options (event/series ticker, status) and providing a concrete example ({'limit': 5, 'status': 'open'}) that demonstrates how to use parameters together. This exceeds the schema's dry parameter descriptions.

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 states 'Prediction-market catalogue with current quotes' with specific verbs ('filter') and resource (market catalogue). It distinguishes from siblings like kalshi_market (single market) and kalshi_events (events) by focusing on listing/filtering markets.

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: filter by event/series ticker or status, paginated by cursor, and mentions 'Auth: none needed.' The line 'Also answers this: polymarket_markets, polymarket_clob_markets' hints at substitutability, but there are no explicit exclusions or precise when-to-use vs alternatives guidance for other siblings.

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