List Option Expiries

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations, only calling it a 'cheap helper.' Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description does not significantly enhance transparency.

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 with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. It efficiently conveys the tool's role but lacks structured parameter documentation.

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 partially compensates for the missing output schema by listing returned fields. However, parameter semantics are absent, and no guidance on required vs optional parameters is given, leaving gaps for a tool with 4 parameters.

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 description fails to explain any of the 4 parameters (optionRootId, clientKey, accountKey, trading) even though schema description coverage is 0%. The term 'option root' is mentioned but not mapped to the parameter, leaving all parameters undocumented.

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 returns available expiries for an option root, listing specific fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like saxo_get_option_chain by noting it's a 'cheap helper' for picking an expiry before pulling the full 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 advises using this tool before pulling the full chain, providing usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives like saxo_list_standard_option_expiries, leaving some ambiguity.

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