analyze_portfolio_greeks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without indicating side effects (e.g., read-only vs. write), required permissions, data consumption, or performance characteristics. The existence of an output schema is not leveraged in the description.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with the key action. However, it could be considered under-specified rather than efficiently concise, as it omits important details.

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?

Despite the single required parameter and existence of an output schema, the description fails to explain what constitutes 'portfolio_data' or what 'Greeks and risk metrics' are returned. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description should compensate by detailing the portfolio_data parameter. It only mentions 'portfolio Greeks and risk metrics' but does not specify required fields, format, or nesting structure, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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 analyzes portfolio Greeks and risk metrics for options positions. It uses a specific verb ('analyze') and resource ('portfolio Greeks and risk metrics'), which distinguishes it from many sibling tools that focus on specific analysis types or data retrieval.

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 like analyze_portfolio_strategies or get_gex_analysis. The description does not specify prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where this tool is preferred.

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