sc_analytics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only lists output contents without describing side effects, read-only nature, authentication needs, or failure modes. For a data retrieval tool, stating it is read-only and safe to call repeatedly would add value but is missing.

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 that efficiently communicates the tool's core purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, missing parameter info and usage guidance. It earns a 4 for being tight but not comprehensive.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema exists), the description still falls short. It lacks parameter semantics and behavioral transparency, which are critical for correct invocation. The output schema covers return values, but the agent needs more context to call this tool appropriately among many siblings.

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 exactly one optional parameter (portfolio_id) with 0% schema description coverage. The description fails to mention this parameter, its purpose, default behavior when null, or how to obtain a valid portfolio_id. Without this, an agent cannot correctly populate the parameter, leading to invocation errors.

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 a clear verb 'Get' and specifically lists the resource 'Scalable Capital portfolio analytics' along with concrete analytics types: allocation breakdowns, sector/region exposure, and performance attribution. This effectively distinguishes it from siblings like sc_holdings or sc_overview, which serve different purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With over 20 sibling tools sharing 'sc_' prefix, an agent cannot determine that sc_analytics is for high-level allocation analysis while sc_holdings gives individual positions. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for appropriate invocation are mentioned.

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