get_pnl

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description respects. Beyond that, it discloses the rate limit and the calculation formula for total P&L, providing useful behavioral context not present in the annotations.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose. It efficiently includes the rate limit and calculation formula without unnecessary verbosity. Every sentence adds value.

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 the output schema exists and input schema covers the single parameter fully, the description provides sufficient context: it explains return components, rate limiting, and total P&L calculation. No gaps for this complexity level.

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 only parameter (limit) is fully described in the input schema with default, min, max, and description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a portfolio snapshot with unrealized P&L per position, specifying the components (credit, bonusCredit, unrealizedPnl, etc.). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_portfolio or get_portfolio_breakdown beyond mentioning a shared rate limit.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description mentions a shared rate limit with get_portfolio and get_portfolio_breakdown but does not clarify the distinct use cases for each.

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