get_put_call_ratio

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the openWorldHint annotation. It doesn't explain what 'data' includes (e.g., current value, historical series, calculation methods), nor does it set expectations about response structure or latency.

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?

A single sentence, 10 words, directly states the tool's purpose with no filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with an openWorldHint annotation, the description is sufficient to convey the basic purpose. However, it leaves ambiguity about market-wide vs. instrument-specific data, which a small clarification could resolve.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema provides no information. The description adds meaning by identifying the domain as put-call ratio data, but doesn't need to elaborate further since there is nothing to configure.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Put-Call Ratio data') with a scope ('derivatives market'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_oi_data and get_option_greeks, as no other tool mentions put-call ratio.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as whether to use it for market-wide sentiment vs. other market data tools. It doesn't mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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