kalshi_get_market

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is established. The description adds the API path (GET /markets/{ticker}) and domain context about market attributes, but it does not disclose other behaviors such as error handling, rate limits, or data completeness. It does not contradict 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 concise, consisting of three sentences that are front-loaded with purpose and include domain context and the endpoint. Slight redundancy in 'Get Market Endpoint for getting data' but not enough to distract. Well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, domain concept (binary outcome market with prices, volume, settlement rules), and the endpoint. It does not detail error scenarios, but that is not critical for this straightforward operation.

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 provides a description for the only parameter ('ticker': 'Market ticker'), covering 100% of parameters. The description reiterates that the tool fetches by ticker but does not add details about ticker format, examples, or accepted values beyond the schema.

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 gets data about a specific market by its ticker, with a concrete verb ('Get') and resource ('market'). It differentiates from siblings like kalshi_get_markets (plural) by emphasizing 'a specific market.' The underlying endpoint is also specified.

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 the tool is for fetching a single market based on ticker, which is clear enough for most use cases. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., kalshi_get_markets for multiple markets) or provide exclusion criteria, so it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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