hl_portfolio

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it provides account value and PnL history payloads but does not clarify whether it is a read-only operation, requires specific permissions, or how the user parameter affects the response. Minimal behavioral detail is given.

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 sentence and is concise, but the phrase 'payloads' is vague and the sentence lacks a verb. It is front-loaded with the core purpose but could be clearer.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered, but the description lacks essential context such as the user parameter's role and how this tool differs from similar user-specific data tools. It is under-specified for an agent to confidently select and invoke.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'user' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description does not mention the 'user' parameter at all, leaving the agent without any guidance on what format or value to provide.

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 identifies the tool's function as a portfolio performance snapshot, mentioning account value and PnL history. It distinguishes from sibling tools like order/fill history by focusing on performance metrics, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no mention of exclusions or preferred scenarios. The description is purely descriptive without contextual usage cues.

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