kalshi_batch_create_orders_v2

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write nature is known. The description adds useful context about rate limits and tier-based write budgets, and specifies the HTTP endpoint. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like financial risk or partial-failure behavior, so it only partially compensates beyond 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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and includes a relevant link and endpoint. Every sentence provides useful information without fluff, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite the complex batch-order schema, the description is thin. It lacks information about response format, error handling, partial-failure semantics, or prerequisites like authentication/funding. While the input schema is rich, the absence of output schema and minimal description leave the tool incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not describe the 'orders' parameter or its structure. It merely says 'batch of event-market orders', adding no meaning beyond the input schema. Since schema coverage is low and the description does not compensate, the parameter semantics are poor.

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 tool submits a batch of event-market orders using the V2 request/response shape, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like single-order creation or batch cancellation. The verb 'submit' and resource 'orders' are specific, and the mention of 'event-market' adds scope.

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 description implies this is the batch-order endpoint, so an agent can infer to use it when multiple orders need to be placed. However, it does not explicitly compare alternatives like kalshi_create_order_v2 or mention when not to use it, lacking clear exclusions.

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