find_options_by_delta

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that results are 'the best matching options sorted by delta proximity,' which is useful, but it doesn't state side effects, edge cases, or behavior when no match exists. The read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'Find.'

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 three short sentences with no filler: objective, examples, and output behavior. The core information is front-loaded.

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 relatively simple lookup tool, the description covers the main inputs, examples of use, and the nature of the output. It does not describe the exact return shape, but the absence of an output schema makes that a minor gap given how specialized the tool is.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only natural-language examples (25-delta put, 50-delta call) and does not provide additional semantic detail beyond the schema.

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: 'Find options closest to a target delta for a given currency and expiry.' This makes the tool's job unambiguous and clearly differentiates it from broader siblings like get_options_chain or get_volatility_surface.

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 examples ('find the 25-delta put' / 'find the 50-delta call') make the intended query scenario explicit. It doesn't name an alternative or give a when-not-to-use rule, but the use case is clear enough to guide selection.

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