Robinhood Get Position

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about currency ('current') and cardinality ('one'), which are not in the schema, but it doesn't cover what happens when no position exists, auth requirements, or rate-limit implications. This is adequate for a simple getter, but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the action, object, scope, and performance benefit with no filler. It avoids repeating the title or restating schema contents.

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 one-parameter getter with an output schema, the essential invocation information is present: what it returns and that it is keyed by symbol. Missing explicit guidance on the all-positions sibling and edge cases like absent positions leaves a small gap, but nothing blocking.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents 'symbol' with a format example. The description only references the symbol indirectly as 'single-symbol lookup' and adds no format or behavioral detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one current stock position'), so an agent immediately knows what it returns. The 'faster single-symbol lookup' qualifier differentiates it from the sibling robinhood_get_positions, which naturally reads as the plural/all-positions counterpart.

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 phrase 'single-symbol lookup' clearly indicates the tool is for fetching one position by symbol, so an agent knows when it is appropriate. It does not explicitly name the alternative for bulk/all-position lookups or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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