wealth_advisory_wealth_portfolio_drift

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions routing through the dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, but does not state whether the tool is read-only or modifies state, or any side effects. Critical behavioral details are 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 brief and front-loaded with the action name, but it sacrifices clarity for brevity. It is not wasteful, yet fails to provide essential information, so a middle score is appropriate.

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 domain (wealth advisory) and the presence of similar sibling tools, the description should differentiate and explain the tool's role. It does neither, leaving the agent with insufficient information to decide when to invoke it.

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. It adds minimal meaning: 'message' is a free-text objective and 'inputs' is an optional JSON string. This still leaves the purpose of these parameters vague, offering little beyond the schema.

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 says 'Run the wealth_advisory domain agent action `wealth_portfolio_drift`' which essentially restates the tool name without explaining what 'portfolio drift' means or what the action accomplishes. It lacks a specific verb and resource, making it tautological.

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 like wealth_advisory_wealth_monte_carlo_retirement or wealth_advisory_wealth_tax_loss_harvest. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context are given.

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