Get Institution Derivatives

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description contributes minimally. It mentions 'pagination and sorting', but these are fully defined in the schema. No additional behavioral details (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits, or data freshness) are provided.

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?

Single concise sentence with all key elements: action, resource, filter, scope, and features (pagination/sorting). No unnecessary words, 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?

Given output schema exists, description does not need to detail return values. It covers the essential purpose and input (CIK, pagination, sorting) adequately. Minor gap: no mention of what derivative data exactly (e.g., put/call positions, values), but the name and title fill that in.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context ('PUT/CALL', '13F options') but does not elaborate on parameter usage (e.g., CIK format, period format, sortBy options). It adds marginal value 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?

Description clearly states 'Get an institution's reported PUT/CALL derivative positions by CIK (13F options)', specifying the action, resource, and scope. This distinctly separates it from sibling tools like get_institution_holdings (general holdings) or get_institution_portfolio_analytics.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned. The description implies usage for derivative positions via CIK but lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for standard holdings) or comparisons with similar tools like get_institution_holdings.

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