sc_portfolio_group_delete

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

The description discloses the behavioral effect of the deletion ('Holdings return to ungrouped'), which is important context beyond a simple delete. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does well but could add more about irreversibility or authorization scope.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the action and effect, and adding the prerequisite in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 count, no nested objects, and the presence of an output schema (implying return structure documented elsewhere), the description covers the key need. It misses a bit on completeness by not explaining the optional portfolio_id parameter, but overall is sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. The description does not detail the two parameters (group_id, portfolio_id) or explain the optional portfolio_id parameter's role. However, with only 2 parameters and 1 required, the simple action is somewhat self-explanatory, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a portfolio group' which is a specific verb and resource. It also provides a side-effect ('Holdings return to ungrouped') that distinguishes this from other related sibling tools like sc_portfolio_group_create or sc_portfolio_group_update.

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 explicitly notes a prerequisite: 'Requires SC_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true', warning the agent that this is a write operation and needs an environment flag enabled. This provides clear guidance on when the tool can be used.

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