run_onboarding_smoke_test

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

The description states that the tool 'Marks onboarding complete if all pass,' which implies a state mutation. However, the annotations include 'readOnlyHint': true, indicating no state modification. This is a contradiction, reducing transparency.

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, concise and front-loaded. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains input (none), behavior (run tests, mark complete), and usage context. It could detail what happens on failure but is sufficient for the simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds context about the tool's purpose but does not need to explain parameters. Baseline 4 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 ('Run'), resource ('end-to-end connectivity smoke test for all configured brokers and data providers'), and scope. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'start_onboarding' and 'validate_broker_connection' by specifying it runs all tests and marks onboarding complete.

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 says 'Call this after setting up credentials to verify everything works before trading,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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