kalshi_historical_market

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It explicitly states the tool is credential-free and returns public data, indicating a read-only, no-auth operation. It also specifies the output is a settled historical row, providing clear behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of 14 words, efficiently conveying core purpose and behavior. However, it omits some details (e.g., 'normalized settled' meaning) that could aid understanding without adding length.

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?

Given one required parameter and no output schema, the description provides adequate baseline info: returns one row, public, credential-free. But it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, and the structure of the returned row, which would be helpful for complete context among many Kalshi sibling tools.

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% for the single parameter 'ticker', which is described as 'Kalshi historical market ticker'. The description adds that it returns a normalized settled row for that ticker, but this is more about the output than parameter meaning. It does not significantly enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it returns one normalized settled historical market row, specifying the resource (historical market detail) and action (returns). Distinguishes from siblings like kalshi_historical_market_history by emphasizing a single row, but does not explicitly differentiate from all similar tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kalshi_historical_market_history or kalshi_historical_markets. No prerequisites or exclusions described. The description merely states functionality without contextual usage advice.

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