Robinhood Get Available Expirations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It indicates a read-only, GET-like operation and accurately describes what the tool returns, but it does not disclose return format, date formatting, sorting, or error/rate behavior. This is adequate for a simple getter but minimal.

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 clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. Every word earns its place, and it avoids repeating the parameter schema.

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 single-parameter, simple read tool, the description is largely complete: it explains the return concept and the schema covers the invocation details. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by 'expiration dates' being a clear result, though no examples or follow-up workflow guidance are provided.

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%: the single symbol parameter already has a clear example-based description. The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond saying 'for a stock,' so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get all available option expiration dates for a stock.' This clearly identifies the tool's output and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_option_chain or get_options_by_expiration_and_strike, which return different option data.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is the precursor for option-chain or options-by-expiration calls, nor does it state any exclusions. Usage context is only implicit from the tool's name and output.

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