futopt_query_oi

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

The description adds behavioral context by explaining the force_query parameter ('True to force refresh, False to use cache') and the trade_date default ('defaults to today'). Since annotations are absent, this information helps the agent understand caching and default behavior.

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 a compact docstring with a one-line purpose, followed by parameter explanations and return type. It is front-loaded, free of fluff, and every sentence contributes useful information.

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 covers purpose, parameters, and returns. It does not mention prerequisites like login, but the sibling tools suggest connectivity is separate. With an output schema present and parameters well-covered, this is sufficiently complete for a simple query tool.

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?

All three parameters are described in plain language, with meaningful interpretation for force_query (refresh vs cache) and trade_date (defaults to today). This adds value beyond the bare schema titles, though it does not detail formats or constraints.

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 the function with a specific verb and resource: 'Query futures/options open interest.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like futopt_query_order (queries orders) and futopt_query_match (queries matches).

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 usage is implied by the tool's name and description but no explicit guidance is given about when to choose this over alternatives, nor are any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. A clear statement like 'use for checking open interest positions' would improve this.

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