compare_portfolios

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

With no annotations, description should disclose behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, auth requirements) but only notes 'Paid tier only.' Does not explain non-obvious behaviors like whether it modifies data or has rate limits.

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?

Single, clear sentence front-loaded with action and scope, plus a brief access note. No redundant or filler content.

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?

Absence of output schema and lack of description about return format or example results leaves agents uncertain about tool's output. Given complexity (risk/return metrics), more context is needed for complete understanding.

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%, so descriptions exist for all parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what parameters already convey; 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?

Description explicitly states the tool compares portfolio allocations head-to-head across risk and return metrics, distinguishing it from sibling tools that analyze single portfolios or perform other functions.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_risk or optimize_portfolio. Only mentions paid tier, leaving agents without decision criteria.

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