Create a position draft

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

Discloses draft-only behavior: 'saved to the user's account... never changes live holdings by itself'. Also mentions required OAuth scope and Bullrun Pro account. Annotation readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false are consistent and complemented by this context.

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?

Description is well-structured with trigger, purpose, prerequisites, distinctions, and guidance. Each sentence serves a purpose; slightly long but earns its length. Could be more concise but effective.

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?

Covers purpose, prerequisites, behavioral constraints, alternatives, and disambiguation guidance. With no output schema, description provides sufficient context for agent to decide when and how to invoke correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by mentioning OAuth scope and Pro account requirement, and provides usage hints for clarifying portfolio and number of ideas. Does not repeat schema descriptions but adds overall parameter usage context.

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 generates 'REVIEWABLE suggested additions for one existing Bullrun portfolio' and uses specific trigger phrases like 'BUY' or 'ADD' to an existing portfolio. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_portfolio_draft and get_portfolio_analytics.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use triggers ('when the user asks what to BUY or ADD to an EXISTING portfolio'), when-not-to-use (use create_portfolio_draft for new portfolio, get_portfolio_analytics for specific ticker), and guidance for unclear cases (confirm portfolio and number of ideas).

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