IV Opportunities

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it identifies statistically extreme IV and suggests mean reversion strategies. It does not contradict the annotation and provides context beyond the annotation's safety signal.

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 concise and well-structured with a summary line, usage triggers, args, and returns. Every sentence provides value, and the layout makes it easy to extract key information quickly.

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 two-parameter, read-only discovery tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states the purpose, when to use, and what it returns ('Opportunity assessment with strategy recommendations'). It lacks only a few edge-case details, but overall it's sufficient for effective tool selection.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The 'Args' section defines each parameter in plain language: 'ticker: Stock symbol' and 'z_score_threshold: Statistical threshold (default 2.0)'. This adds the necessary meaning for both parameters, though not deeply detailed.

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: 'Find IV mean reversion trading opportunities.' It further specifies the statistical criterion (>2 std from mean) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on mean reversion and strategy suggestions, not just data retrieval.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this tool when the user asks about: Mean reversion opportunities, Extreme IV levels, When to sell/buy volatility, IV statistical analysis.' This gives clear context for when to invoke the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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