sc_holdings

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It accurately states this is a read-only retrieval of live broker data, implying no destructive side effects. It could mention rate limits or data freshness but overall is honest and sufficient.

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, focused sentence at 20 words. It includes a lead verb ('Get'), the resource ('Scalable Capital portfolio holdings'), and key output fields. However, the note 'Live broker data' could be integrated more seamlessly.

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 low parameter coverage (0%) and no annotations, the description is incomplete for a tool with 2 parameters and an output schema. The output schema exists but isn't leveraged; the description could clarify return structure or pagination. Still, for a simple holdings retrieval, it provides the core purpose.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It mentions nothing about include_ytd (likely toggles year-to-date metrics) or portfolio_id (filters by portfolio scope). The description adds no semantics beyond what the schema already shows, leaving the agent underspecified.

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 tool retrieves Scalable Capital portfolio holdings with current prices, quantities, and market values. It distinguishes itself from siblings like sc_transactions or sc_watchlist by focusing on live holdings data rather than history or watchlists.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sc_overview or sc_cash_breakdown, nor does it specify prerequisites (e.g., authentication or portfolio existence). It lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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