Option Quote

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent, read-only, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the symbol limit and list of return fields, but it does not disclose potential rate limits or other behavioral nuances beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and immediately listing return fields. Every word provides value with no redundancy.

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 query tool with rich annotations and complete schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, input constraints, and output fields. No gaps exist given the tool's complexity.

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 'symbols' has 100% schema description coverage with an example format. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema, so a 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 it retrieves option quotes for up to 500 symbols and explicitly lists the returned fields (last_done, implied_volatility, etc.). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'quote' (stocks) and 'option_chain_*' (chains).

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 mentions a max of 500 symbols, which is a usage constraint. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like 'quote' or 'option_chain_info_by_date', nor any when-not-to-use scenarios.

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