get_portfolio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive behavior, so the description correctly focuses on semantics: the default resolution rule (latest completed period, any cadence) and the warning that these are synthetic allocations, not real holdings. It does not mention pagination or sizing of the ledger, but the presence of an output schema covers return shape.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by the default-resolution rule and the disclaiming boundary. Each sentence adds distinct information and none repeats the schema.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers the key ambiguity (synthetic ledger vs. real holdings) plus the default period. Only the as_of input format and explicit routing against siblings are missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It adds real value for report_id (the reproducibility pin) and implies as_of selects the period, but never specifies the accepted format of as_of (date string, date-range, period label), which is essential for a string-typed untyped param.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieve the opening/closing allocations and audit metadata of a saved synthetic disclosure ledger. The closing disclaimer ('not actual member holdings or the executable strategy portfolio') draws a clear boundary, though sibling get_portfolio_changes is never mentioned by name.

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?

Gives an implicit default ('latest saved completed period, of any cadence') and an instruction to pin report_id for reproducibility, which is useful. However, it never says when to call this rather than get_portfolio_changes or search_disclosures, so the agent is left to infer the choice.

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