analyze_options_strategy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states outputs (max profit, loss, break-even, Greeks, chart) but does not disclose data source (live vs. cached), freshness, or any side effects. It implies calculation and visualization but lacks detail on behavior like whether it uses market data 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?

Three clear sentences: first defines function and outputs, second lists supported strategy complexity, third states use case. No extraneous words, efficient and well-structured.

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 an options analysis tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, outputs, and supported strategies. Lacks mention of chart format or data source, but overall sufficient for an agent to understand when to use it.

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% with parameter descriptions. The tool description adds context about supporting multi-leg strategies and that premium can be optional (already in schema). The description provides marginal additional clarity but does not significantly extend beyond schema definitions.

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 the tool analyzes options strategies to calculate specific metrics (max profit, loss, break-even, Greeks) and generate a chart. It lists supported multi-leg strategies (spreads, straddles, iron condors, butterflies), distinguishing it from siblings like 'calculate_greeks' (only Greeks) or 'get_options_chain' (raw data).

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 mentions it helps visualize risk/reward before entering a trade, which implies appropriate usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or reference alternative tools (e.g., calculate_greeks for just Greeks, get_options_chain for raw data). No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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