calculate_iv

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

Lacking annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the Newton-Raphson method but omits important details such as convergence criteria, sensitivity to initial guesses, error conditions, or whether the calculation works for all option types. The description provides minimal insight into the tool's behavior.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. It contains no redundant information, but its brevity may sacrifice necessary details for completeness.

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 complexity of implied volatility calculation (6 parameters, numerical method), the description is too minimal. It fails to mention output format, assumptions, or limitations. No output schema is provided, so the agent lacks information about what the tool returns.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter explanations in the description, the meaning of parameters S, K, T, r, option_type, and market_price is not explained. The description adds no value beyond the schema's parameter names and types, leaving the agent to guess their 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 clearly states the tool calculates implied volatility using the Newton-Raphson method, specifying the resource and method. This differentiates it from sibling tools like calculate_option_price (which computes option price) and calculate_greeks (which computes sensitivities).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like calculate_option_price or calculate_greeks. The description does not mention prerequisites, constraints, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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