options_expirations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat that. However, the description adds context about the tool's role in a multi-step process, but lacks details on data freshness, rate limits, or pagination. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not outstanding.

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 two sentences: first defines the tool's core function, second provides usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 a simple read-only tool with one parameter, the description covers the essential purpose and workflow. It lacks explicit mention of the output format (e.g., array of date strings), but the context of 'expiration dates' and the sequential usage mitigates this gap. Overall, it is sufficiently informative for an agent to use correctly.

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 documents the symbol parameter. The description's mention of 'stock ticker' does not add meaning beyond the schema's example. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as no additional parameter semantics are provided.

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 retrieves all available option expiration dates for a stock ticker, using specific verb-resource pairing. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like options_chain and options_max_pain by prescribing a sequential usage: call this first to discover dates, then pass one to those tools.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool ('call this first') and provides alternatives ('options_chain or options_max_pain'), giving clear guidance on the intended workflow and when not to use it.

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