fetch_all_open_positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the return fields (ticker, quantity, averagePrice, etc.) and mentioning the pieQuantity field for pies, without contradicting any 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?

The description is concise with two short paragraphs and a 'Returns' line. The first sentence immediately states the main purpose. Every sentence provides necessary context without redundancy.

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 no parameters, comprehensive annotations, and an output schema (implied by 'List of Position objects'), the description fully covers what the tool does, its return structure, and special cases like pies. It is complete for a read-only, parameterless tool.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Schema coverage is 100% trivially. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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 uses 'Retrieve every open position' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'search_specific_position_by_ticker' for single position lookup and 'fetch_portfolio_summary' for aggregated view.

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 states 'Use this to get a complete view of current holdings' and provides alternative tools but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool. However, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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