get_holdings

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

No annotations provided, so the description must reveal behavioral traits. It discloses the output (assets, weights, values) but omits details like data freshness, authentication requirements, or any side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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?

One concise sentence, 14 words, front-loads the key action and resource. No wasted words.

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?

Output schema exists, so return format is covered. The description sufficiently explains the core output (list, weights, values) for a simple tool with one parameter. Minor gap: could mention that the symbol must be an ETF, but the tool name implies it.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by specifying that the symbol should be an ETF, which is not explicit in the schema description. This helps clarify the tool's domain beyond the schema.

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' and the resource 'list of constituent assets, weight percentages, and values held inside an ETF', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_etfs or get_quote.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_etfs or get_symbol_profile; no context on appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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