get_options_skew

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, but no details on permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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 very concise: one sentence for purpose, two for parameters, one for return type. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema, the description only says 'dict: Options skew analysis data', which is generic. It does not explain what fields are returned (e.g., strikes, IVs), which would help an agent interpret the result. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning: defines ticker as 'symbol of the security' and expiration_date as optional string defaulting to nearest expiration. However, it omits the expected date format (e.g., 'YYYY-MM-DD').

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 'Retrieve' and resource 'options skew analysis', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_option_chain, get_options_by_moneyness, etc., which handle other aspects of options 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 description implies usage for skew analysis, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_option_chain or get_options_volume_analysis. There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites.

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