futopt_query_match

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions force_query for refresh vs cache, which is useful, but does not state if the operation is read-only, any side effects, or authentication requirements. Some transparency is present, but incomplete.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main verb. It includes the Args section and Returns, but could be slightly better structured with formatting. No wasted sentences, though it is minimal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return types are covered. However, the description lacks context on what constitutes a 'trade match', how it differs from futopt_query_order, or any preconditions. The cache behavior is useful, but overall completeness is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain force_query as 'True to force refresh, False to use cache', adding meaning beyond the schema's title/default. account_id is brief but acceptable. Adequate compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states 'Query futures/options trade matches' with a specific verb (query) and resource (futures/options trade matches), distinguishing it from stock_query_match and other sibling 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like futopt_query_order or futopt_query_oi. It only mentions the force_query cache behavior, but does not explain under what circumstances to choose this tool.

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