sc_derivatives_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only discloses that the tool returns derivative ISINs (implied by 'Use returned derivative ISIN'). It does not state read-only nature, error behavior, pagination (despite limit/offset parameters), or authentication requirements. The hint about requiring a 'known underlying ISIN' is helpful but insufficient.

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?

Two sentences: one for purpose, one for next step. No redundancy, every word adds value. Perfectly front-loaded with the core action and context.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description omits explanation of 6 parameters (3 required) and their acceptable values. The lack of schema descriptions places the burden entirely on the descriptive text, which fails to cover the input requirements needed for correct invocation.

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%, yet the description provides no parameter-level details. It mentions 'underlying ISIN' but does not explain derivative_type, strategy, limit, offset, or portfolio_id. The agent must infer acceptable values from the separate example parenthetical, which is ambiguous.

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 tool searches for derivatives (knockouts, warrants, factors) on a known underlying ISIN, using a specific verb ('Search') and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sc_search by narrowing the scope to derivatives and explicitly connecting to sc_quote for pricing.

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 specifies the context: search for derivatives given a known underlying ISIN, and advises using sc_quote for pricing. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use sc_search instead), nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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