Close Position

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds that it sells shares back to the market, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose potential partial closes (via the 'shares' parameter), market impact, or that the action is irreversible beyond what the annotation implies.

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 a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, so the description should provide some context about behavior and outcomes. It covers the basic action but omits edge cases like partial closes, the optional 'outcome' parameter, and what the response contains. The schema fills in parameter details, but overall completeness is moderate given the financial action.

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% descriptor coverage for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning or clarify parameter interactions beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Close') and resource ('open position') and explains the mechanism ('selling shares back to the market'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_positions, which only list positions, and there is no other close tool in the sibling list.

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 implies usage when an open position exists, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions (e.g., when to use sell orders directly). The context is clear but not explicit.

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