reference_get_option_contracts

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'List option contracts with various filters.' It doesn't mention pagination, sort defaults, whether expired contracts are included, or what the response structure looks like. This is a significant gap for a listing endpoint.

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 concise (one sentence), but it's too vague to be considered well-structured. It lacks even a high-level explanation of the filter categories, making it under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is severely inadequate—it doesn't explain what the tool returns, how filters interact, or any behavior. It is far below the minimum viable for a tool of this complexity.

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 doesn't mention any specific parameters. 'Various filters' is an empty phrase that adds no meaning to the schema's parameter names. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('option contracts'), and the plural form distinguishes it from the sibling 'reference_get_option_contract'. However, 'various filters' is vague and doesn't specify what kind of filters or the exact scope.

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is for listing contracts, that it's not for quotes/trades, or how it differs from the singular 'reference_get_option_contract'.

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