get_portfolio_history

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: heavy read costing 5x budget, effect on `remaining` in rate-limit status, auth requirement, deposit-neutral PnL, monotonic volume, and per-window cadence/capacity. No contradictions with annotations (none provided).

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?

Dense but efficient; front-loads purpose, then precise details without fluff. Every sentence contributes essential info such as capacities, comparisons, and cost implications.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description sufficiently describes return content, ordering, and key properties. Covers authentication, rate-limit impact, and window-specific constraints, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 covers both parameters but description adds deep meaning: explains how `window` selects cadence and capacity, how `limit` clamps to capacity, and default behavior. This exceeds schema basics and clarifies interplay.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get' with specific resource 'portfolio time-series' and enumerates content (equity, PnL, volume) and window behavior. Explicitly differentiates from sibling `get_equity_history`, making purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance by contrasting with `get_equity_history` and noting both derive from same source. Also warns about heavy rate-limit cost and advises polling sparingly, giving clear operational context.

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