get_option_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It only lists content fields and says 'comprehensive', but fails to disclose important behaviors such as pagination (limit/page_token), feed distinctions (opra vs indicative), or that snapshots may reflect trade/quote timestamps. This is a significant gap for a tool with such parameters.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary action ('Retrieves comprehensive snapshots') and ends with the key inclusions. No wasted words; every component adds value.

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 schema and output schema are rich, so not explaining return format is acceptable. However, the description lacks behavioral context (pagination, feed selection) and usage guidance, which are critical for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly among many option-related siblings. It is adequate but not complete.

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 has 100% description coverage for all five parameters, including meanings, defaults, and constraints. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Retrieves') and resource ('comprehensive snapshots of option contracts'), and explicitly lists the included data fields (latest trade, quote, implied volatility, Greeks). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_option_latest_quote or get_option_chain, which target narrower or different data.

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 phrase 'comprehensive snapshots' implies this is for broad option data rather than a single latest quote or trade, but no explicit alternatives are mentioned. There is no direct 'when to use vs. when not to use' guidance, leaving the agent to infer from the word 'comprehensive'.

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