options_get_previous_close

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it gets OHLC data; it does not describe the return format, whether adjusted=true is default, or what happens if the previous day is not a trading day. The behavior is minimally defined.

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 with no wasted words. It clearly front-loads the action and object, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

There is no output schema or annotations to supplement the description. The tool's return structure, edge cases, and the role of the 'adjusted' parameter are unaddressed. For a simple get, the description is under-specified and leaves important context gaps.

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%, and the description does not explain either parameter. While 'ticker' is implicitly an option contract symbol, the 'adjusted' boolean is entirely undocumented, leaving users without understanding of how it affects the data.

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 verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'previous day's OHLC for an option contract'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like options_get_daily_open_close (which gets a specific date's open/close) and options_get_aggregate_bars (which gets bars over a range).

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. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios such as needing historical ranges instead of just the previous close.

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