aureon_get_portfolio

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 implies a read of the current state, but says nothing about auth requirements, freshness/staleness, whether the book is cached, or what marks represent. A single noun phrase is thin disclosure for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One short, front-loaded line with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than optimal density.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must stand in as the only documentation. It names the data returned but not its shape or meaning (e.g., what 'marks' or 'weights' are computed from), leaving a modest gap for an agent deciding how to use the result.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for; baseline 4 applies. The mention of returned fields (positions, marks, weights) is a small value-add beyond the empty 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?

States a specific resource ('capital book') and verb-like action ('snapshot') plus the contents returned (positions, marks, weights). 'Current' implicitly distinguishes it from siblings such as aureon_get_portfolio_history and aureon_get_portfolio_watch_flow, though the differentiation is left to inference.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives like aureon_get_portfolio_history, aureon_sync_portfolio, or aureon_get_allocation_vs_target. The word 'current' hints that it is the live view, but nothing states that explicitly.

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