currency_option_chain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only identifies the resource as an option chain, but does not describe return format, data coverage, or confirm it is read-only. This is minimal and leaves behavior unspecified.

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 one concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the essential information and every word earns its place.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and only one sentence, the description is too sparse to fully inform an agent about invocation behavior and return data. It does not mention output composition or parameter constraints, making it incomplete even for a low-complexity tool.

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 schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the symbol parameter or expected format. The default 'USDINR' and the phrase 'currency pair' offer a hint, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states the tool returns an option chain for a currency pair, clearly identifying the resource and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like index_option_chain and equities_option_chain by specifying currency pair, though it lacks an explicit verb.

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?

'Option chain for a currency pair' gives a clear context for when the tool applies, but it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it. Usage is implied by the asset-class scope rather than stated with exclusions.

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