Get Kalshi order book

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful domain behavior beyond the annotations: Kalshi publishes bids only and asks are derived via a NO bid at p being a YES ask at 1 - p, plus best-levels-first ordering.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, and the derived-asks nuance follows immediately. No filler.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. The only meaningful gap is the undocumented depth parameter and ticker semantics.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden and it does not mention either parameter. Neither 'ticker' (market vs event ticker) nor 'depth' (number of book levels, default 10) is explained anywhere, leaving both ambiguous for the caller.

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 with scope: 'Get the live YES order book for a Kalshi market'. It is clear what the tool returns, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling get_order_book, leaving the agent to guess whether this is the Kalshi-specific variant or a duplicate.

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 when-to-use guidance and no named alternative, despite siblings get_order_book, kalshi_market, and kalshi_markets competing for overlap. The agent gets domain context (Kalshi market) but no routing rule.

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