get_portfolio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. Description adds details on returned data (including open orders, cash figures) and the non-IRA constraint, providing useful behavioral context beyond 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?

Two short paragraphs: first sentence states purpose, bullet-like list of returns, constraint, then parameter explanation. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema, description focuses on high-level return categories (positions, equity, etc.) and the IRA constraint. Also documents optional parameter behavior. Fully covers what an agent needs to decide 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?

Single parameter account_id is explained: it is optional if PUBLIC_COM_ACCOUNT_ID is set. This adds meaning beyond the schema (which only defines type and nullability) by specifying default behavior.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a snapshot of the account portfolio' and lists specific returned data (positions, equity, buying power, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle orders, quotes, or accounts.

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?

Explicitly notes that only non-IRA accounts are supported, providing a clear exclusion. Alternatively, could mention that get_accounts is for account list, but not required. Context is clear enough.

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