spread_straddle

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The term 'Analyze' is vague and does not state whether the tool is read-only, what outputs are produced, or any side effects. There is no information about return format, data source, or limitations.

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 very concise: two sentences plus an argument list. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes necessary parameter type hints (date format). Every word earns its place, though the brevity leaves out behavioral details.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and only 3 basic parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'Analyze' returns (e.g., profit/loss, risk metrics), nor does it state any prerequisites or limitations. A user would have no idea what data or results to expect.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by providing brief explanations for all three parameters: 'Ticker symbol', 'Expiration date (YYYY-MM-DD)', and 'Strike price for both legs'. The strike description adds value by clarifying it applies to both legs, though the explanations are otherwise minimal and match the obvious schema titles.

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 states it analyzes a long straddle (buy call + put at same strike), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling spread tools by specifying the long straddle strategy and the same-strike requirement.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative spread tools (e.g., spread_strangle, spread_vertical). The description only implies usage for long straddle analysis, with no exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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