Skip to main content
Glama
hmesutozsoy

oddsrail

by hmesutozsoy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

kalshi_get_market

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch detailed data for a single Kalshi market by entering its ticker symbol.

Instructions

Get one Kalshi market by ticker.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tickerYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.18.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "kalshi_get_marketOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds minimal scoping detail by saying the lookup is by ticker and returns a single market, but it does not disclose edge-case behavior like unknown-ticker handling or market availability. This is acceptable for a simple read-only getter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence contains exactly the information needed to identify the operation. There is no filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter, read-only lookup tool with supportive annotations, the description is largely sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. It does not specify the return shape or ticker format, but those are minor gaps given the low complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only restates that `ticker` is the lookup key. It provides no ticker format, example, or clarification of what qualifies as a valid Kalshi ticker, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('one Kalshi market'), and the lookup key ('by ticker'), making the core operation unambiguous. It does not differentiate from the sibling `get_market`, but the behavior itself is clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `kalshi_search_markets`, `find_markets`, or the similarly named `get_market`. The only implied signal is that the user already has a specific ticker.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools