build_strategy

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Says 'with real market prices', hinting at live data usage, but does not disclose if execution-related, authentication needs, or potential side effects. Minimal behavioral 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?

Single sentence is concise but missing structured information. Could be organized with parameter details while maintaining brevity.

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?

Tool has 4 parameters (3 required) and no output schema; sibling tools include many strategy/calculation tools. Description fails to explain return value (e.g., what does 'build' produce?), prerequisites (e.g., must call get_option_chain first?), or how the strategy is constructed—leaving significant gaps.

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 coverage 0%, so description must compensate. Only 'strategy' is exemplified with types; 'symbol', 'expiry', and 'strikes' are not explained. Adds little meaning beyond schema titles.

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?

Clearly states verb 'build' and resource 'options strategy'. Lists example strategies (iron_condor, bull_call_spread). However, does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_strategies or calculate_option_price, which could also relate to strategy construction.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., calculating theoretical prices or listing strategies). Implies it uses real prices, but doesn't explain the distinction from calculating theoretical prices or other analysis tools.

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