kalshi_get_milestone

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the endpoint 'GET /milestones/{milestone_id}', which is mildly informative but doesn't disclose behaviors like return format, errors, or data scope. No contradiction with annotations, but minimal added value beyond what annotations provide.

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 and concise. The first sentence is slightly redundant ('Get Milestone Endpoint' + 'getting data about'), but it still conveys the purpose. The second sentence provides the concrete API call, which is useful. No extra fluff, so it earns a solid score.

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 get-by-ID tool with a single parameter and strong annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It doesn't explain the response structure, but no output schema exists, and the read-only nature plus the clear endpoint partially compensate. It could mention what 'milestone data' includes, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% with the parameter 'milestone_id' described as 'Milestone ID'. The description doesn't add meaning beyond the schema—it merely restates that the milestone is fetched 'by its ID'. With high schema coverage, the description doesn't need to compensate significantly, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets data for a specific milestone by ID, using the verb 'getting' with the resource 'milestone'. It distinguishes from the sibling kalshi_get_milestones by emphasizing 'specific' and 'by its ID', making it unambiguous which tool to use for a single milestone.

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 usage: you need a milestone ID to fetch that specific milestone. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like kalshi_get_milestones for listing all, but the distinction is clear enough from the wording. This is more than just implicit; it sets the context for when to use this tool.

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