Get Option Snapshot

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

The 'Get' wording is consistent with the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, and the description adds that the tool returns quote, volatility, and greeks. It does not go beyond annotations with side-effect detail, but no contradiction exists and the read-only behavior is clear.

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 single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and output. It contains no filler or redundant 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?

For a simple read-only snapshot tool with one object parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could be slightly more explicit about the need for a fully resolved contract (e.g., strike/expiry/right), but 'fully specified single-leg option' covers the main requirement.

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?

The description does not add specific meaning to the `instrument` parameter beyond saying it must represent a fully specified single-leg option. The schema already describes individual fields like symbol, securityType, strike, expiry, and right, so the description contributes limited additional parameter context.

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 a specific action ('Get') and a specific resource ('option snapshot'), and enumerates the returned data (quote, volatility, greeks). The qualifier 'fully specified single-leg option' distinguishes it from chain and multi-leg 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 implies when to use the tool—when a fully specified single-leg option snapshot is needed—but it does not explicitly name alternative tools like get_quote or get_option_chain or state when not to use them. More explicit cross-tool guidance would improve this score.

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