Option Expiry Dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds no additional behavioral context beyond the basic function. With annotations present, the description is sufficient but not enhanced.

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 sentence that is perfectly concise with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 simple tool with one input and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it does not describe the output format (e.g., list of dates as strings) or any potential error cases, leaving some ambiguity for an automated agent. Given the simplicity, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the only parameter (symbol). The tool description does not add any new meaning or context about the parameter beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb ("Get") and clearly identifies the resource ("option chain expiry dates") and the scope ("for a symbol"). This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools like option_chain_info_by_date by focusing on expiry dates specifically.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (when needing option expiry dates for a symbol) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives like option_chain_info_by_date. The usage context is clear from the name but lacks explicit exclusions.

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