DeleteMyPortfolioPermanently delete one of the USER's own portfolios and every lot in it, open and closed. This cannot be undone and it destroys the recorded cost basis and realized-profit history. ALWAYS confirm with the user first, naming the portfolio and how many lots it holds. Call GetMyPortfolio if you do not already know.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The exact name of the portfolio to delete. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description goes beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation by detailing exactly what is destroyed: 'every lot in it, open and closed', and what is lost: 'recorded cost basis and realized-profit history'. It emphasizes irreversibility. No contradiction with annotations.
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 concise sentences, each substantive. First sentence states action and scope, second explains consequences and irreversibility, third provides safety guidance. No wasted 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 the tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and annotations are present, the description fully covers purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral transparency, and parameter context. The agent can confidently select and invoke this tool correctly after reading the description.
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 single parameter 'name' has 100% schema description coverage, stating it requires 'The exact name of the portfolio to delete'. The description adds only contextual emphasis (confirming the name) but no new semantic details beyond the schema. Baseline 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 'permanently delete one of the USER's own portfolios and every lot in it', specifying the resource (portfolio) and scope (including lots). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like RemovePortfolioLot or AddPortfolioLot by mentioning deletion of the entire portfolio.
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 instructs the agent to 'ALWAYS confirm with the user first, naming the portfolio and how many lots it holds' and to call GetMyPortfolio if the number of lots is unknown. This provides clear contextual guidance on when and how to use the tool safely.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, with detailed descriptions that cross-reference related alternatives. A few near-duplicate names could cause misselection, notably SearchDocument versus SearchDocuments and GetCftcPositioning versus GetLatestCftcPositioning.
Tool names consistently follow a VerbNoun camelCase pattern: Get for retrievals, Search for discovery, List/Read for document access, and Add/Close/Remove/Update/Watch/Create/Delete for portfolio mutations. Despite the large count, there is no mixing of naming conventions or unpredictable verb styles.
108 tools is an extreme surface area, far beyond the 3-15 well-scoped range and well past the 25+ threshold. Even for a broad financial data platform, this creates a heavy selection burden and substantial context overhead for agents.
The server covers an unusually wide domain: prices, fundamentals, SEC filings, options, insider activity, 13F holdings, short interest, macro data, funds, IPOs, and full portfolio lifecycle management. Notable gaps remain, such as a basic company profile/ticker-resolution tool, dividend history, and analyst estimates, so it is not a perfect 5.