get_option_volatility

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose more. It hints at a read operation (get) and mentions input constraints, but does not describe return values, side effects, or permissions. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Reasonably concise: two sentences with key info front-loaded. Includes some extraneous Chinese characters, but overall efficient.

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?

Lacks explanation of the missing 'hv_time_period' parameter and what the output contains. For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'code' parameter (option code) and 'query_time_period' (with mapping), but leaves 'hv_time_period' undefined. Partial coverage.

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?

Clearly states it's for 'option volatility analysis (IV/HV) for a single option contract,' which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_option_chain or get_option_quote. The verb 'analyze' is implied, and the focus on volatility is unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly instructs to resolve an option code using resolve_option_code first, and explains the query_time_period mapping. Lacks explicit comparison with alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the prerequisite is valuable context.

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