Fund Position Overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint true and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the auth requirement and the 'all held funds' scope, which annotations do not convey, but says nothing about return shape, pagination, or empty-result behavior.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The scope and auth requirement appear immediately. Minor redundancy in restating that there are no parameters.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations covering data shape, the description could have sketched what an 'overview' contains. For a simple authenticated read it is adequate but leaves the agent guessing about the response payload.

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% for the single _jq parameter, so the schema does the explaining. The description's 'No parameters' is a reasonable simplification for a tool with no business inputs, but adds no meaning 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?

States a concrete verb and resource: 'Get the signed-in user's fund positions overview (all held funds)'. The scope qualifier 'all held funds' clarifies it is a broad overview. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like fund_positions or fund_position, so an agent cannot tell them apart from the description alone.

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 gives one prerequisite ('Requires an authenticated token') but no when-to-use guidance and no routing against the many fund_position* siblings. Usage is only implied by the 'overview' framing.

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