get_all_portfolios

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the operation fetches (a read action) and executes in parallel, adding useful behavioral context beyond a bare schema. It does not detail error handling, pagination, or permissions, but for a simple read-only fetch this is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the verb, object, scope, and execution style with no wasted words. It is highly concise and well structured.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies the full scope (all holding types), and the output schema handles return structure. No additional context is necessary.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description correctly avoids inventing parameters and instead focuses on the scope of the returned data, which is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as 'all portfolio holdings' with enumerated asset types (cash, equities, mutual funds, bonds, other). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cash_balances or get_equity_balances, which target individual asset types.

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 implies use when a complete view across all asset classes is needed, especially with the 'in parallel' execution hint. It does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the sibling tool names and the 'all' scope make the intended usage clear.

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