getHolderPerformanceSummary

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 context about tracking performance and benchmark comparison, which is helpful but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like data freshness or pagination limits. No contradiction with 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 a single paragraph of three sentences, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the core function. Minor improvement could be even shorter by removing redundant phrasing like 'this data helps track'.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should clarify what data the API returns (e.g., specific metrics, pagination details). The current description is too high-level and lacks details about the response format or how to interpret performance insights.

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?

Input schema has 2 parameters (cik, page) with full descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 provides insights into institutional investor performance based on stock holdings, tracking performance and benchmark comparison. It uses a specific verb 'provides insights' and identifies the resource 'institutional investors'. However, it could be more precise about what data is returned (e.g., metrics included) similar to sibling tools like getPositionsSummary.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getPositionsSummary, getFundHoldings, or getFundDisclosure. It does not specify the appropriate context, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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