Get order book

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. 'Reads live data and changes nothing' largely restates that. The one genuinely additive point is the freshness/liveness cue ('live') and the cross-venue capability, which is modest added value.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler; the purpose and scope are front-loaded, venue coverage follows, and the buy/sell cue closes it. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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 an output schema present, the return payload need not be described, and the description covers venue addressing and a timing heuristic. It is nearly complete, though it never clarifies the boundary with the parallel kalshi_book tool, which an agent choosing between them would want.

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% for both parameters, including the 'kalshi:<TICKER>' format and the yes/no outcome default, so the schema already documents everything. The description's mention of the Kalshi slug form repeats the schema verbatim and adds no syntax or constraint beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the live asks and bids (price and size) for one market outcome'), scoping it to a single outcome rather than a whole market. It also covers both venues (Polymarket slugs, Kalshi via 'kalshi:<TICKER>'). It does not, however, draw a line against the sibling kalshi_book, which appears to serve an overlapping purpose.

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?

Gives a clear usage trigger: 'check it before sizing a buy or sell,' which ties the tool to the buy/sell workflow. It offers no explicit exclusions or guidance on when kalshi_book (or get_market) would be preferred, so the routing between siblings is left to inference.

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