option_snapshot_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Real-time last NBBO quote' but does not explain response structure, whether multiple contracts are returned, or any market-hour/data coverage nuances. It gives only a minimal behavioral hint and no safety or side-effect context.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters and numerous filtering options. The '[VALUE]' prefix appears to be a placeholder artifact, reducing polish and structure.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must provide context. It only covers the core function and omits the flexible filtering options (strike, right, DTE, wildcard expiration) and the fact that it can return multiple contracts. This leaves an agent without enough context to scope requests effectively.

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 schema provides descriptions for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the generic 'option contract', leaving the schema to carry the parameter semantics.

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 identifies the resource as a real-time NBBO quote for an option contract, clearly distinguishing it from sibling snapshot tools like trade or OHLC. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'Gets' or 'Returns', so it reads as a noun phrase rather than an actionable instruction, which is why it is not a 5.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as option_snapshot_trade or option_history_quote. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or alternative tool recommendations.

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