calculate_greeks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the model (Black-Scholes) and defines the output Greeks meaningfully. However, it omits limitations (e.g., European options only) and does not mention that the tool can fetch underlying price if not provided, nor any authentication or rate limit concerns.

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 front-loaded with the main action and includes structured bullet points for Greek definitions. It is reasonably concise, though the definitions could be considered verbose; every sentence serves a purpose without unnecessary words.

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 output schema, the description compensates by explaining the returned Greeks. Parameter descriptions in schema are complete. The tool's context is adequately covered for a financial calculation tool, though it assumes familiarity with Black-Scholes and option types.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds definitions for Greeks (outputs) but does not enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Calculate' and the resource 'option Greeks', specifying the Black-Scholes model. It lists the specific Greeks (Delta, Gamma, Theta, Vega, Rho), which uniquely identifies this tool among siblings like 'calculate_historical_volatility' or 'calculate_indicator'.

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 the tool is used for computing option Greeks with given parameters, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'analyze_options_strategy' might also involve Greeks). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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