List Kalshi markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the 'read-only' remark is largely redundant. The useful additions are the status enumeration and the note that slug equals the Kalshi ticker, but return/pagination behavior is not addressed.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the scope constraint; little waste, though the format is terse enough that the ticker-filter sentence reads as a fragment.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the read-only/list framing covers the safety side. The only shortfall is the undocumented limit parameter, minor for a low-complexity list 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 0%, so the description must compensate; it does for three of four params, defining status values (open/closed/settled) and explaining that series_ticker/event_ticker narrow the list. The limit parameter is left undocumented, a small gap.

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 ('List Kalshi markets') and clarifies scope with 'read-only; trading stays on Polymarket'. The singular sibling kalshi_market exists, and while the plural/singular distinction is inferable, the description never explicitly routes between them.

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?

It hints at narrowing via series_ticker/event_ticker and status, which implies when to use the filters, but gives no explicit when-to-use versus siblings like kalshi_market or get_markets_by_tag, and no exclusions.

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