get_put_options

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

No annotations exist. The description implies read-only behavior via the 'get' prefix and mentions default expiration behavior. However, it does not explain authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects beyond the basic retrieval.

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 extremely concise: a one-line purpose followed by a docstring-style listing of args and returns. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 output schema exists, the return description is sufficient. The tool has only two parameters with adequate explanations. However, the presence of many options-related siblings suggests missing guidance on when to use this specific tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful explanations for both parameters: ticker as 'The symbol of the security' and expiration with default behavior. This fully compensates for the schema 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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'put options' with parameters ticker and expiration. It distinguishes from siblings like get_call_options and get_option_chain by specifying put options.

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 implicitly indicates use for retrieving put options, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_option_chain or get_call_options. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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