get_portfolio

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint: true. The description adds value by disclosing that filters only affect instrument aggregates, not account totals, and mentions rate limit sharing with siblings, enhancing transparency beyond 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?

Description is efficient and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, then detailed fields, then filter caveat, then rate limit. No redundancy, 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 output schema exists, description covers key points: field details, filter behavior, rate limit. Could mention that limit applies to instrument aggregates, but largely complete for the tool's complexity.

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. The description adds context that filters narrow instrument aggregates only, but does not elaborate on all parameters (e.g., conversion_mode not mentioned). Value added is moderate.

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 'Aggregated portfolio: account totals plus one aggregate per instrument', using specific verbs and resource. It differentiates from sibling get_portfolio_breakdown by mentioning shared rate limit and contrasting filter behavior.

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?

Usage is implied as retrieving aggregated portfolio data, but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are given. The description notes filter behavior and rate limit sharing, but lacks when-not-to-use guidance.

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