Verify which backtest symbols have historical date coverage before running regression tests. Check available date ranges for SPY, XSP, SPX, or other symbols.
List tastytrade Backtester symbols and their available historical date ranges. Use this before regression tests to verify SPY, XSP, SPX, or other symbol coverage.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of date ranges adds useful context, but the description does not disclose output structure, pagination, or any other behavioral details beyond the core action.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action and subject are front-loaded, and the usage guidance follows naturally.
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?
For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete: it states the resource, the information returned, and the intended workflow context. An agent has enough to call it correctly.
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 tool has zero parametersampions and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify about inputs. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adequately describes what the tool returns.
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 tool lists tastytrade Backtester symbols and their available historical date ranges, which is a distinct resource from sibling tools like tastytrade_list_backtests. The verb 'List' is specific and the subject is concrete.
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?
It explicitly tells agents to use this before regression tests to verify symbol coverage, giving a clear intended context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but for a zero-parameter listing tool the guidance is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.