analyze_portfolio_exposureGiven a list of tickers or company ids, report that basket's aggregate exposure across supply-chain segments and countries, and flag where holdings share the same upstream suppliers (correlated single points of failure). Informational supply-chain analysis over public data, not investment advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| holdings | Yes | Tickers (e.g. ['NVDA','TSM']) or company ids. Up to 40. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description bears full transparency burden. It correctly conveys the read-only, informational nature and the output type, but does not disclose potential limitations, data sources, or behavior under error conditions. It is adequate but not highly detailed.
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 extremely concise at two sentences. Every sentence adds value, and the main action is front-loaded. There is no redundant or extraneous information.
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 the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and what it returns. It mentions aggregate exposure across segments and countries and flagging of correlated suppliers, providing a complete picture for an agent.
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 100% coverage for the only parameter 'holdings', describing it as a list of tickers or company IDs with a max of 40. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so baseline score 3 applies.
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's function: it reports aggregate exposure across supply-chain segments and countries for a basket of tickers, and flags correlated upstream suppliers. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like compare_companies or get_company which focus on individual entities or comparisons.
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 indicates use for a list of tickers or company IDs, implying portfolio-level analysis. While it sets context ('Informational supply-chain analysis over public data, not investment advice'), it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: analyzing portfolio exposure, comparing companies, finding chokepoints, getting company details, country exposure, deals, segments, supply chain walk, and company search. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., 'get_company', 'search_companies', 'find_chokepoints'). The convention is uniform and predictable.
9 tools is well-scoped for a specialized supply chain analysis server. Each tool serves a distinct query or analysis need without being too few or too many.
The tool set covers core operations: search, detail, comparison, portfolio analysis, chokepoint identification, country exposure, deals, and supply chain graph traversal. Minor gaps like historical trends or alerts exist but do not hinder primary use cases.