get_derivatives_bars_daily_futures

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) are consistent and additional context is added: premium subscription required, data returned includes open interest. No contradictions. Description enriches annotations with plan and data details.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and includes arg explanations. Some redundancy due to bilingual content (Japanese translations) but remains focused and efficient. Could be slightly trimmed without loss.

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?

Covers essential aspects: purpose, parameters, return data, subscription tier, and use cases. No gaps identified given the tool's complexity and available annotations/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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains all three parameters: date format, category with examples, and contract_flag meaning. This provides critical context missing from 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?

Description clearly states it fetches daily futures OHLC bars, lists use cases (先物, 日経先物, etc.), and specifies return fields (OHLC, volume, open interest). Differentiates from sibling tools like options (get_derivatives_bars_daily_options) and equities (get_equities_bars_daily).

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?

Indicates 'Premium only' subscription requirement and lists applicable futures types. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, the context of sibling tool names and the domain-specific language clearly scopes usage to futures daily bars.

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