getFundAssetExposure

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context by detailing the output fields (market value, share numbers, weight percentages) and the reverse-lookup nature, which goes beyond 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler words. Every sentence provides essential information about what the tool does and what data it returns.

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 simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's function and output. However, the parameter contradiction (fund vs stock symbol) and lack of any usage guidance slightly reduce completeness. The openWorldHint is noted but not reinforced in the description.

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 parameter description 'Fund symbol' contradicts the tool description's implication that the input is a stock symbol ('which ETFs hold specific stocks'). While the description adds meaning beyond the schema, it introduces confusion. With 100% schema coverage but no additional clarification, the added value is undermined by the inconsistency.

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 uses a specific verb 'Discover' and resource 'which ETFs hold specific stocks', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like getFundHoldings (which lists holdings of a single fund). It also mentions the type of data returned (market value, share numbers, weight percentages), making the purpose unmistakable.

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 the tool is for finding ETFs that hold a given stock but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like getFundHoldings or getFundInfo. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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