Option Volume (Daily)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which cover safety and idempotency. The description adds the types of data returned (volume, open interest, ratios) but does not disclose rate limits, data freshness, or error behavior.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, good annotations), the description covers the essential data retrieved and the required symbol. However, it lacks details on return format, default behavior for null count, and handling of invalid input.

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 descriptions for both 'symbol' and 'count'. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what is already in the schema; it merely restates the same information.

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 as 'daily historical option call/put volume, open interest, and put/call ratios for a US stock'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'option_volume' by specifying 'daily' and 'historical'.

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 the tool is for daily volume data, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus other option tools (e.g., option_chain, option_quote). No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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