get_futures_data

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states what data is returned (lot size, expiry, OI, price). It does not mention whether data is real-time or delayed, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The behavioral impact is minimally disclosed.

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 concise single sentence that lists key data fields. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Could be slightly improved by structuring the fields more clearly, but is efficient and not verbose.

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 one simple parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic return fields. However, it lacks details like data freshness (real-time vs delayed), explanation of acronyms (OI), and example usage. Adequate for a simple tool but has notable 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?

The single parameter 'symbol' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description does not explain the expected format (e.g., ticker, exchange suffix). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's type definition.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'futures data' with specific fields (lot size, expiry, OI, price). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_spot_price' and 'get_oi_data' by combining futures-specific information.

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 'get_spot_price' or 'get_option_chain'. No exclusions or context for appropriate usage, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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