get_holdings

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

The only annotation is openWorldHint, and the description adds the list of returned content but does not explicitly state read-only safety, prerequisites like authentication, or response format. The 'Get' verb implies a safe read, but more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with a colon-separated list of contents. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description lists core data fields but omits return shape and does not distinguish it from get_all_holdings, which could lead to incorrect tool selection. With no output schema, additional detail about the response structure would improve completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides 100% coverage. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter-level detail.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with resource 'portfolio holdings' and enumerates returned fields (stocks, quantities, average prices, P&L, LTP). It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_all_holdings or get_positions, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of login requirements, no exclusions, and no reference to sibling tools such as get_all_holdings or get_positions.

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