calculate_allocation_drift

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool returns drift and suggestions, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly mention side effects or confirm no modifications are made. This is adequate but not fully explicit.

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 concise and well-structured, using two sentences to cover purpose, parameter details, and output. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently describes the return (per-class drift in percentage points and BRL, plus BUY/SELL suggestions). It omits details about error handling or edge cases, but these are not critical for a basic understanding. The description is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The description explains the only parameter, 'target_path', as an optional override for the default location. It also clarifies the 'tolerance_pp' field in the config file, adding semantic meaning. The description does not specify the default location, which is a minor gap.

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's core function: comparing current portfolio allocation to a target file and returning per-class drift with BUY/SELL suggestions. It is specific and easily distinguishable from sibling tools, though it could be slightly more explicit about the expected output format.

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 guidance on optional parameters: 'target_path' to override the default and 'tolerance_pp' as a field in the target file to treat drifts within a band as 'ok'. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like 'get_portfolio_summary' or 'suggest_buys', leaving some inference required.

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