List Standard Option Expiry Dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds context about returning a calendar from reference data, confirming read-only behavior, but does not introduce new behavioral details.

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 three sentences: first states purpose, second gives a usage example, third provides alternative. It is front-loaded and every sentence 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 tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. Annotations cover behavioral aspects well. However, the description omits explanation of the 'fromDate' parameter and does not describe the return format, leaving minor gaps.

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 input schema has a single optional parameter 'fromDate' with a pattern for date format, but the description does not explain its purpose or effect. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to compensate for this gap.

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 the standardized option-expiry calendar, listing 3rd Friday monthlies, quarterlies, and weeklies. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'saxo_list_option_expiries' which handles per-option-root expiries.

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 explicitly provides a use case ('is 2027-01-15 a standard monthly?' reasoning) and directly names the alternative sibling tool for per-option-root expiries.

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