derivatives_put-call-parity

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by explaining the output: 'Returns: parity check, theoretical values, and any arbitrage amount.' This behavioral context goes beyond annotations.

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 two sentences: the first states the tool's purpose, and the second provides usage instructions and expected outputs. Every sentence is necessary, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

Given 7 parameters (5 required) and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and returns. It could mention default values for optional parameters, but the schema already handles that. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a mathematical 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists key inputs ('call price, put price, spot, strike, rate, and time') but omits the optional 'q' (dividend yield). It doesn't add significant meaning beyond the schema, earning a middle score.

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's purpose: 'Put-call parity check and arbitrage detection.' This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling derivatives tools like options_price or options_implied-vol, which serve different purposes.

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 explicitly says 'Use when checking put-call parity or detecting arbitrage opportunities,' providing clear guidance on when to use it. However, it does not discuss alternatives or when not to use it, which would be helpful but is not critical given the tool's niche.

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