options_greeks

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the meaning of each Greek but lacks details on assumptions (e.g., Black-Scholes model), data sources, rate limits, or limitations. Provides some transparency 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?

Well-structured: summary, benefit statement, bullet list of Greeks, Args, Examples. Every sentence adds value; could be slightly more concise but overall efficient.

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 output schema exists, description adequately explains input and what the tool provides. Examples clarify usage. No need to detail return structure since output schema covers it. Complete enough for agent understanding.

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?

Description adds meaning beyond the input schema: explains symbol as NSE stock/index symbol, expiry as optional YYYY-MM-DD with nearest default, and provides examples. Schema coverage is 0%, so description compensates well.

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?

Description clearly states the tool calculates Black-Scholes Greeks for option strikes, lists and explains each Greek (Delta, Gamma, Theta, Vega, Rho), and distinguishes from sibling tools like nse_options_chain and options_oi_analytics by focusing on Greeks calculation.

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 NSE options Greeks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like nse_options_chain or options_oi_analytics, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. Examples are helpful but guidance is implicit.

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