get_vix_panel

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds interpretive context about backwardation/contango. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like data frequency, latency, or whether the data is a snapshot. With annotations covering safety, the added value is moderate but not exceptional.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core data content and followed by a useful interpretative phrase. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description sufficiently covers purpose and usage context. It explains what data is returned and how to interpret it for vol-regime decisions. Minor gaps like data source or update frequency are not critical for tool selection and are likely covered by the output schema.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is complete. Per the rubric, a 0-parameter tool receives a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to compensate for missing parameter information, as none exist.

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 identifies the tool as returning VIX level, term structure (VIX vs VIX3M vs VIX6M), and implied vol regime. It explains the interpretation of backwardation/contango, which further specifies the resource and distinguishes it from other market data tools like get_yield_curve or get_indices.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use for vol-regime context before running stress scenarios or sizing options overlays.' This is clear context, but it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, which prevents a 5.

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