get_third_order_greeks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that expiration can be None for nearest, and that the tool returns data, but it does not discuss error behavior, data source, or any limitations. The 'Get' verb implies a read operation, but deeper behavioral context is missing.

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 well-structured: a headline, a bulleted list of Greek definitions, usage guidance, and an args/returns section. It is concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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 tool's moderate complexity and lack of an output schema, the description adequately explains the five Greek definitions and parameters. However, it does not describe the return structure or any prerequisites, leaving some gaps.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates with an Args section: 'ticker: Stock symbol' and 'expiration: Specific expiration or None for nearest.' This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions, though it could provide more detail on format.

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 'Get third-order Greeks' and enumerates the specific Greeks (Speed, Zomma, Color, Vomma, Ultima), with definitions for each. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_greeks_heatmap or get_charm_exposure by specifying the exact resource and scope.

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 includes an explicit 'Use this tool when...' section listing third-order Greek requests and advanced Greeks analysis. It provides clear context for when to use, though it does not mention alternative tools or when not to use, so it falls short of the top score.

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