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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the data source (Yahoo Finance, no API key required), but says nothing about output shape, ordering, or empty-ticker behavior. Adds some value on top of annotations, but not rich behavioral context.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then a tight bulleted usage block, then a one-line source note. Every sentence earns its place and the ordering constraint appears early.

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 no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The boilerplate params (mcp_prompt_id, wholesaler_ids, source_resource_id) are undocumented in the description, but they are generic plumbing rather than tool-specific 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 coverage is reported as 0%, but the nested parameter schema in fact carries extensive descriptions; the description itself only implies a ticker input ('for a ticker') without naming or constraining the symbol parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the structured schema does the heavy lifting.

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 all available options expiry dates for a ticker') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling it feeds into, GetOptionsChain. An agent can identify the tool's role without opening 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 explicit when-to-use conditions (discovering which contracts exist, needing an expiry to pass downstream) and names the dependent tool and the ordering ('Use this before calling GetOptionsChain'). Nothing is left to inference.

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