Get Kalshi market

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that it reads the live Kalshi API and that no trade is placed, plus the ticker-to-slug convention used by the trade tools, but it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or error behavior on an unknown ticker.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause and the follow-up sentences are short and functional. The line break mid-sentence ('Reads the live Kalshi API. To trade it...') is slightly fragmented but costs nothing in comprehension.

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 a rich annotation set and an output schema covering return values, the description only needs to disambiguate purpose and hand off to the trade path, which it does. Minor gaps (auth expectations, behavior for an invalid ticker) remain but are peripheral for a single-parameter read tool.

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% and the single ticker parameter carries its own example, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining that the same ticker acts as the 'kalshi:<TICKER>' slug_or_id across buy/sell/get_market, which gives the parameter cross-tool meaning beyond the schema's local format.

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+resource+scope: 'Get one Kalshi market by ticker', with an explicit read-only qualifier. The singular 'one market' distinguishes it from the sibling list tools (kalshi_markets, list_markets, search_markets) without the agent needing to open any schema.

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 concrete routing guidance: to trade, pass 'kalshi:<TICKER>' as slug_or_id to buy or sell, and notes the same slug works in get_market. This tells the agent how this tool chains into action tools. It stops short of saying when to prefer this over get_market or kalshi_markets, so no explicit exclusion.

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