get_call_options

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes the optional expiration parameter and its default behavior, and the return type. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, nor does it cover error handling, rate limits, or data freshness. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 and well-structured with a summary line, Args section, and Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or extraneous information.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, parameters, and return type. The presence of an output schema reduces the burden on the description for return values. However, it could mention that it only returns call options to further differentiate from siblings.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must fully define parameters. It provides clear semantics: ticker is 'the symbol of the security', and expiration is 'the expiration date' with the note that None uses the nearest expiration. This adds complete meaning beyond the schema.

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 that the tool retrieves call options for a given ticker and expiration date. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'call options' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_put_options and get_option_chain by focusing only on calls.

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 usage when call options are needed for a specific ticker and expiration, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like get_option_chain or get_put_options. The note about default expiration provides some guidance, but no exclusions or comparisons are given.

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