0DTE Analytics

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint: true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds valuable context by listing the specific analytics returned and noting the tool's limitation on daily-expiration tickers and trading days. While it doesn't discuss return format or edge cases, it goes beyond the annotation's minimal info, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 tightly organized: purpose, includes, usage triggers, restriction, args, and returns. Every section adds value and there is no redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to scan.

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 one simple parameter, a read-only annotation, and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, what it includes, when to use it, parameter format, and return content. There are no missing critical elements for an agent to successfully select and invoke the tool.

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 provides only type and title for ticker with 0% description coverage. The description compensates fully with: 'Args: ticker: Stock symbol with 0DTE listings (e.g., 'SPY')'. It clarifies the parameter's meaning and provides an example, giving the agent everything needed.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get 0DTE (same-day expiration) analytics for a ticker.' It enumerates the exact data included (gamma exposure, gamma flip level, max pain, theta decay projection, today's chain), clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like get_gex or get_options_chain. The purpose is unambiguous and precise.

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?

It provides explicit use cases: 'Use this tool when the user asks about: 0DTE setups... intraday gamma/pinning levels... today's expiration chain.' It also gives a critical restriction: 'Only meaningful for tickers with daily expirations (SPY, QQQ, SPX...) on trading days.' This covers both when and when-not, meeting the highest bar.

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