get_options

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'latest' and 'snapshot', implying a read-only, point-in-time view, but it does not explain what a chain includes (e.g., calls/puts, strikes), how the expiration parameter affects results, or whether all expirations are returned by default. It also omits any potential limitations or side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently states the tool's purpose and source without any filler.

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 complex financial data tool (options chain) with no output schema and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the structure of the returned data, the effect of the optional expiration parameter, or any default behavior. An agent would need to infer or experiment to understand the full scope.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both parameters have clear descriptions (e.g., 'Ticker, e.g. NVDA' and 'Expiration date YYYY-MM-DD'). The tool description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves an options chain snapshot for a stock, with the source (Yahoo). It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('options chain snapshot'), which distinguishes it from the sibling get_option_quote that likely retrieves a single option quote rather than the full chain.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_option_quote or search_symbol. The description does not mention scenarios (e.g., needing the full chain vs. a specific option quote) or any conditions for selection.

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