get_options_chain

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that strikes bracket spot rather than coming from one end, and that IV rank and expected move appear at the top. This is useful but does not cover potential behaviors like default expiration or output shape; however, the output schema covers the latter.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, with the main purpose in the first phrase. It uses four sentences without fluff, though the 'cheap or dear' explanation is slightly interpretive but still adds value.

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?

The description is comprehensive for a data retrieval tool: it states what is returned, how strikes are selected, and names alternatives for other needs. With an output schema present, no further return-value details are needed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds slight nuance by explaining 'bracket spot' which relates to the strikes parameter, but does not meaningfully expand on the schema's already clear parameter definitions.

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?

The description clearly identifies the tool as returning an options chain centered around the current price, with IV rank and expected move highlighted. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by naming get_options_analytics for greeks/skew and get_unusual_options for unusual flow.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'For greeks and put/call skew as well, call get_options_analytics; to hunt unusual flow call get_unusual_options.' This tells the agent when to choose an alternative, implying this tool is for the core chain plus IV rank and expected move.

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