get_holdings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly marks the operation as read-only, which is useful, but it does not describe pagination, value freshness, or any other behavioral caveats. It is adequate but minimal.

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 short, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes only the necessary parameter context. The Korean read-only note is redundant but not harmful; overall there is no wasted information.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only query with an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It identifies the required input source and scope, though it could better explain how it relates to sibling tools such as get_buying_power or get_accounts.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful context by explaining that account_seq is 'the numeric accountSeq returned by get_accounts(),' giving the parameter provenance and expected format beyond the raw 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get portfolio summary and per-symbol positions for one account.' It also clarifies the read-only nature and distinguishes itself from account-list-level tools by emphasizing 'one account.'

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 instruction that account_seq is 'returned by get_accounts()' implies a clear workflow: call get_accounts first, then get holdings for a chosen account. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools like get_buying_power or get_accounts.

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