sc_overview

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

The description adds the behavioral trait 'Returns live data directly from the broker', indicating freshness. However, it does not disclose idempotency, rate limits, or side effects. Since no annotations exist, the description carries the burden and provides minimal but non-zero transparency.

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 very concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose. Every word adds value, but it omits parameter explanations, which slightly reduces its efficiency. Still, it is well-structured and not verbose.

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 existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the return value. However, with two optional parameters left unexplained and no guidance on default behavior, the description is not fully complete. It is sufficient for a basic understanding but lacks detail for correct parameter usage.

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 explain the two parameters (include_ytd, portfolio_id) at all. The schema itself lacks descriptions, so the tool definition provides no semantic meaning for parameters beyond their names and types. The description must compensate but fails entirely.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'Scalable Capital broker portfolio overview', listing the specific data returned (total value, cash, performance). It also mentions live data, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like sc_holdings or sc_transactions that focus on subsets or historical records.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not state prerequisites, exclusion criteria, or suggest other tools for different scenarios. With many sibling tools (e.g., sc_holdings, sc_analytics), explicit usage guidance is missing.

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