get_portfolio_breakdown

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context about returned fields (credit, bonusCredit, positions with detailed attributes, pending orders) and rate limit sharing. It does not disclose any additional behavioral concerns beyond what annotations imply, but adds useful detail.

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 somewhat lengthy but efficiently packs detailed information about returned fields and usage hints. It is front-loaded with the purpose and uses a bullet-like structure via commas, which is adequate.

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, the description thoroughly explains the return values including position fields, pending orders, and copy-trading summaries. It provides a comprehensive overview, though some minor structural details of orders are not explicitly enumerated.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the single 'limit' parameter. The tool description does not add additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 the tool returns a 'Position-level portfolio snapshot: open positions and pending orders.' It is specific about the resource and scope, and contrasts with siblings like get_pnl and get_portfolio.

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?

The description explicitly says it is 'Cheaper than get_pnl — no unrealized P&L fields.' and notes the rate limit pool shared with get_portfolio and get_pnl, giving clear context for when to use. It could be more explicit about exact conditions, but the guidance is strong.

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