Broker Holding (Daily)

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

Annotations already declare safety and idempotency. Description adds context about data source and daily frequency, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or pagination. Baseline 3 since annotations cover core safety profile.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and scope. No superfluous words. Efficient and clear.

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 output schema exists to document return values, and annotations cover safety, the description is adequate. It specifies source and scope, though date range or history depth is missing. Still fairly complete for a data retrieval tool.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented. Description restates purpose but does not add new meaning beyond schema (e.g., format or constraints). Baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves daily holding history for a specific broker and symbol, with explicit scope (HK stocks) and data source (HKEX CCASS). Distinguishes from siblings like broker_holding and broker_holding_detail.

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?

Implied usage for HK stocks only, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., broker_holding, broker_holding_detail). No when-not or exclusion criteria provided.

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