avanza_paper_session_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation with 'Return', but does not explain how account_id, session_id, and tenant_session_id interact, whether a session must be active, or whether the summary covers current or historical data.

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 sentence with no redundant words, and the main action is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though it omits essential details.

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?

With three undocumented optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. An agent lacks the information needed to invoke the tool correctly or interpret its result.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not clarify any of the three parameters. An agent cannot determine which identifier is needed or how they relate to a 'paper trading session/account'.

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 ('Return') and resource ('P/L summary for a paper trading session/account'), which distinguishes it from related paper-account tools like avanza_paper_trades or avanza_paper_positions. However, 'session/account' is ambiguous about whether the summary is for a session, an account, or both.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as avanza_paper_trades, avanza_paper_positions, avanza_sessions, or avanza_account_performance. There is also no mention of prerequisites like selecting a paper account or session first.

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