List portfolio items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output fields and sorting behavior but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description is adequate but lacks some contextual details beyond what is implicit.

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?

Two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the core purpose and output fields, the second mentions optional filters and a typical use case. Information density is high.

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?

Given the 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of the return value including key fields like price, quantity, float, etc. It covers the sorting and filter options well. It could mention pagination if limit is used, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by summarizing the filter options (limit, min_value, portfolio name/slug) and explaining the portfolio parameter's behavior for multi-portfolio accounts, which enhances understanding 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?

Clearly states it lists items from Pricempire trader portfolios with detailed fields and sorting. The verb 'list' and resource 'portfolio items' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like analyze_portfolio (analysis) and get_portfolio_value (aggregate value).

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?

Describes the use case as 'what are my most valuable items' style questions, which gives clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings, though the purpose is self-explanatory given the sibling names.

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