Get user public portfolio

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

Annotations already provide 'readOnlyHint: true', so the description is not burdened with that. It adds context ('live', 'public') but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or caching. This is adequate given the safety 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word adds value: 'Get', 'live public portfolio holdings', and the parenthetical 'instruments, allocation' define the output scope.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and a read-only operation, the description sufficiently covers the input (username) and output (holdings with allocation). No output schema exists, but the description hints at what to expect. The sibling context is broad but the tool is self-contained.

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 schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for 'username' ('eToro username'). The description does not add further semantics 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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('user's live public portfolio holdings'), and what it returns ('instruments, allocation'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'etoro_get_portfolio' (likely for own portfolio) and 'etoro_get_user_performance' (performance metrics).

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 implies usage for retrieving a specific user's public holdings but does not explicitly compare to similar tools (e.g., 'etoro_get_portfolio') or state when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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