spread_strangle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states 'Analyze long strangle' without disclosing what the analysis includes, return format, or side effects. It provides no behavioral context beyond the tool's name, such as whether it uses current market data or outputs risk metrics.

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 concise with a one-sentence purpose and a well-formatted args list. Every line serves a purpose; the parameter details are included because the schema lacks them, so the length is justified.

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?

The description covers purpose and parameter semantics but omits any description of the output or return value, which is critical given there is no output schema. It also lacks usage exclusions or comparisons to siblings, leaving the overall context incomplete for selecting this tool.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description compensates by explaining each parameter: symbol as ticker, expiry in YYYY-MM-DD, and strikes relative to current price (put below, call above). These details add meaning beyond the schema's bare types.

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 'Analyze long strangle (buy OTM call + OTM put)', providing a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like spread_straddle and spread_vertical, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 implies its usage for long strangle analysis, giving clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives, stopping just short of full guidance.

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