get_fund_top_holdings

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

With no annotations, the description minimally discloses it is a retrieval operation, but does not mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or criteria for 'top' holdings (e.g., count or ranking method).

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 succinct: two sentences with clear Args/Returns sections. No unnecessary words, front-loaded purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, so the description is adequate but lacks details like 'top N' or sorting criteria. Could be more informative.

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 single parameter 'ticker' as 'The symbol of the fund', adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition. With 0% schema coverage, this compensates well for one parameter.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'top holdings for a specific fund'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_full_holdings' by focusing on top holdings, but does not explicitly differentiate from other fund holding tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_full_holdings' or 'get_fund_sector_weighting'. The description lacks context for selection.

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