Remove Stocks from Portfolio

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

Annotations already expose destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds valuable process context: the action cannot be undone and user confirmation is required before removing symbols. It also clarifies the 'entirely' removal scope, which goes beyond the annotation flags.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then uses compact bullet examples to illustrate concrete triggering phrases. Every sentence earns its place, and the critical safety warnings are prominently included without redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter destructive tool, the description covers the key operational points: confirmation, irreversibility, scope, and routing. It does not specify response shape or behavior for already-absent symbols, but with no output schema and such a focused operation, the remaining gaps are minor.

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 for the single symbols parameter is 100%, with min/max constraints and an example provided. The description does not need to re-explain the schema and adds only incidental context about deriving symbols from get_user_portfolio, so the baseline score applies.

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 action ('Remove one or more stocks from the user's portfolio entirely') with the resource clearly named. It also differentiates itself from update_portfolio_stock by explicitly noting that partial sells should use that sibling tool.

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 provides explicit use cases covering single delete, bulk semantic deletion, and clearing the entire portfolio. It instructs the agent to confirm with the user before acting and routes partial sells to update_portfolio_stock, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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