Dates you can trade

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results include distance and strike counts, but does not disclose ordering, pagination, or data freshness. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then specifies exactly what information is returned. The title provides additional context without redundancy.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are already documented; annotations cover read-only and open-world behavior. The simple one-parameter schema makes the description sufficient for correct invocation. Only missing usage differentiation keeps it from a 5.

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 0%, but there is only one required parameter with a self-explanatory enum. The description's 'for a coin' loosely maps to currency but adds no format, meaning, or nuance beyond the schema's enum values.

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 states a specific verb and object: 'Every listed expiry for a coin,' plus the included fields ('how far away it is and how many strikes are quoted'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_currencies and get_option_chain.

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?

Usage context is implied by the title 'Dates you can trade' and the phrase 'for a coin,' but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or contrast with alternatives such as get_option_chain. The agent must infer when this is the right tool.

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