get_option_contract

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieves' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as potential error responses, required permissions, or differences from similar snapshot/quote tools. It adds minimal value beyond the tool name.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no redundant words and is easy to scan.

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 description is adequate for a simple single-parameter retrieval tool, especially given the presence of an output schema. However, it lacks guidance on how to format symbols or distinguish this tool from the many similar option-related siblings (e.g., 'get_option_snapshot', 'get_option_latest_quote'). The completeness is sufficient but not enriched.

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 description covers 100% of the single parameter ('symbol_or_id' with 'symbol or contract ID'). The tool description merely repeats this information and adds no extra semantic detail, such as the expected format of a symbol or how to use a contract ID. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is high.

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 verb ('Retrieves'), the resource ('option contract'), and the method ('by symbol or contract ID'). It explicitly says 'single', which distinguishes it from the plural sibling 'get_option_contracts' and other option-related tools like 'get_option_chain'.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving a single option contract when you have a symbol or contract ID. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for batch lookups use 'get_option_contracts'). It provides clear context but no exclusions.

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