Get portfolio

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: it reads the local account and pulls live market data, which explains the openWorld behavior and warns that a network fetch is involved. It stops short of noting latency, staleness, or failure behavior when live pricing is unavailable.

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 sentences of substance plus one routing sentence. The output shape is front-loaded before the disambiguation guidance, and nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained; the description still summarizes them usefully. For a one-parameter read tool with full annotation and schema coverage, the definition gives the agent everything needed to select and 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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'account' parameter is fully documented there, including naming constraints and the default. The description's phrase 'an account's open positions' only implies the parameter's role, adding no syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list an account's open positions) plus what data is attached (live prices, unrealized P&L). This distinguishes it from get_balance, history, and stats, which all touch the same account but return different things.

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 names three alternative tools and the condition that selects each (cash totals, past trades, performance metrics). An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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