kalshi_get_order_queue_positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing safety. The description adds conceptual context (price-time priority for queue position) and the GET endpoint, but does not disclose pagination, response structure, or default subaccount behavior beyond schema. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with useful definition, but the first sentence contains redundancy ('Get Queue Positions for Orders' then 'for getting queue positions'). Still, it is front-loaded and not overly verbose.

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 description covers the core concept, endpoint, and scope (all resting orders), which is sufficient for a read-only query with optional filters. No output schema exists, but the description doesn't explain return shape; nevertheless, the combination of annotations and schema provides enough context for most use cases.

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 clear descriptions for all three optional parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, which is acceptable given high coverage; it only states the general purpose of all resting orders.

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 fetches queue positions for all resting orders, with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from singular variants by specifying 'all resting orders' and also defines the meaning of queue position, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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 'all resting orders' implies the tool is for querying all orders rather than a specific one, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as the singular get_order_queue_position tool or specify when to use filtering parameters. Guidance is implied, not explicit.

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