get_oi_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states that the tool fetches historical OI data and reuses a date/interval format; it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, response shape nuances, or any read-only guarantees beyond the verb 'Get.'

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. It states the core purpose first and uses a sibling reference to avoid repeating format documentation.

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 5 required, entirely undocumented parameters, no annotations, and a close sibling named get_oi_buildup, the description is too sparse to fully guide an agent. The get_candle_data reference helps for format, but the agent would need to fetch another tool's schema and infer selection criteria on its own.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning for interval, fromdate, and todate by referencing get_candle_data's format, but exchange and symboltoken are left completely unexplained, with no enums or allowed-value hints.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get historical open-interest (OI) data for F&O instruments.' It also references get_candle_data for format, which hints at lineage but does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the closely named sibling get_oi_buildup.

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 phrase 'Same interval/date format as get_candle_data' gives the agent useful format guidance and implies a relationship between the tools. However, it does not state when to prefer get_oi_data over get_oi_buildup or get_candle_data, leaving usage selection somewhat implicit.

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