options_get_sma

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get Simple Moving Average' with no details on data range, calculation parameters, return format, or side effects. This is essentially a bare statement of function.

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 short sentence with no filler words and is front-loaded with the verb. However, it is so brief that it lacks any context, making it efficient but minimal.

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 the complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), this one-sentence description is grossly insufficient. It does not explain input semantics, output format, or use cases, leaving the agent to guess.

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 schema describes eight parameters with zero description coverage. The tool description adds no explanation of parameters like 'adjusted,' 'timespan,' 'series_type,' or 'window_size,' leaving the agent without semantic understanding.

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 names the resource ('Simple Moving Average for an option contract'), which clearly states what the tool does. It differentiates from similar indicator tools by mentioning 'option contract,' though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

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 about when to use this tool versus others, such as options_get_ema or stocks_get_sma. There are no exclusions, alternatives, or context cues.

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