kalshi_get_structured_targets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read. The description adds only 'Calls GET /structured_targets' and repeats page_size bounds already present in the schema. It does not disclose response format, pagination behavior, or any limitations beyond schema-encoded constraints.

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 short but structurally awkward: 'Get Structured Targets Page size (min: 1, max: 2000) Calls GET /structured_targets.' It jumbles the purpose with a parameter detail, making it less scannable. It earns a middle score because it is one line and front-loads the main verb, but the structure could be cleaner.

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?

With 5 optional parameters, no output schema, and the presence of sibling tools, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain what structured targets are, what the response contains, how cursor pagination works, or how filters behave. The name implies listing, but the description leaves the agent with gaps for a moderately complex read 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 5 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description's only parameter-related note ('Page size (min: 1, max: 2000)') adds no new meaning beyond what the page_size schema already provides. 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 'Get Structured Targets' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'kalshi_get_structured_target' (singular) by indicating a plural list operation, and it names the exact endpoint 'GET /structured_targets'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it's for listing multiple targets, how it relates to the singular 'kalshi_get_structured_target', or any context about filters/pagination being optional.

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