show_portfolio

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

No annotations provided, but the description compensates fully: it explains return fields, currency handling, asset_type values, syncedAt semantics, edge cases (null syncedAt/currentPrice), and optional risk summary. All behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 detailed but well-structured, front-loaded with purpose and key fields. While it could be slightly more concise, every sentence adds value and the flow is logical.

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 output schema, the description fully covers return fields, edge cases, and usage context. It leaves no critical gaps for an agent to understand what the tool does and returns.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter (display_currency). The description adds extra context: lists allowed currency codes and explains FX decomposition behavior when non-USD, enhancing meaning beyond the schema's brief description.

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 it returns 'Current holdings derived from the user's transaction log' and lists specific fields (ticker, shares, avg cost, etc.). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning itself as a drill-down tool and recommending get_market_brief for broader queries.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('when the holdings table itself is the sole thing asked for, or to inspect FX decomposition') and when not to ('call get_market_brief first'). Names a clear alternative (get_market_brief) that provides broader context.

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