getPredictionPortfolioSummary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It honestly describes the tool as a query returning aggregated summary data with no side effects. It also includes an agent hint about usage, fully disclosing the tool's behavior and limitations.

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, well-structured, and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: first sentence states purpose and returns, second gives use case, third gives agent hint with alternatives. No unnecessary text.

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 no parameters, no output schema, but sibling tools exist, the description is complete. It lists all returned fields and provides clear context for when to use this tool versus siblings. No gaps.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info as none exist.

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 queries an aggregated summary of the authenticated user's prediction market portfolio, listing specific return fields. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools getPredictionPositionList and getPredictionPositionHistory by explicitly stating when to use each.

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 explicit guidance: use for high-level overview, and for individual position details use getPredictionPositionList, for historical P&L breakdown use getPredictionPositionHistory. This clearly indicates when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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