options_get_rsi

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

With no annotations provided, the description offers no behavioral details beyond the basic 'Get' operation. It doesn't disclose the data source, read-only nature, calculation specifics, or response format, leaving the agent with minimal understanding of what invoking this tool entails.

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 efficient sentence with no wordiness, making it easy to parse and front-loaded. It earns its place without any fluff.

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?

With 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the one-sentence description is grossly insufficient for an agent to determine correct usage, parameter values, and expected outcomes.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies that the 'symbol' parameter refers to an option contract, but leaves limit, order, adjusted, timespan, timestamp, series_type, and window_size unexplained.

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 retrieves the Relative Strength Index for an option contract, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Relative Strength Index for an option contract'), distinguishing it from sibling RSI tools for stocks, forex, and crypto.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many alternative RSI or options indicator tools. There is no mention of preferred use cases, exclusion criteria, or alternatives.

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