kalshi_series

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context by specifying 'Auth: none needed' and providing the exact return shape, which goes beyond what annotations offer. It does not contradict any 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 two concise sentences plus a return-type block. Every sentence carries useful information: the first defines the action and scope, the second provides the return structure and authentication requirement. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's simplicity (one well-documented parameter) and the presence of strong annotations, the description is largely complete. It fully specifies the return value, which is essential since no output schema is provided. It could mention error behavior for unknown tickers, but that is a minor omission for a simple read-only endpoint.

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 input schema covers the single parameter seriesTicker with a description and example ('KXNBA'), so schema_description_coverage is 100%. The description's 'by ticker' merely restates the parameter's purpose without adding new semantic detail, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'One series by ticker' which clearly indicates a single-series lookup by its unique identifier, and enumerates the returned fields (title, category, settlement sources, fee structure). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kalshi_series_list, which presumably returns multiple series, by emphasizing the singular scope and the ticker-based access.

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?

The phrase 'by ticker' implies the tool should be used when a specific series ticker is known, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives, exclusions, or when not to use it (e.g., when listing all series would be more appropriate). There is no reference to sibling tools like kalshi_series_list, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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