get_holdings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation via 'Get' and adds temporal scope with 'currently', but it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or any other operational behavior. This is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 with no filler or redundant content. Every word contributes to defining what the tool returns and for what account context.

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?

The tool is simple with zero parameters and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return structure. However, it leaves ambiguity around how this relates to sibling tools like get_all_holdings, and it does not provide any usage or exclusion context, making it only minimally complete.

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 input schema has no parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies, and the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter docs.

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 clearly states a specific action ('Get') and resource ('equity holdings currently in the demat account'), making the tool's core purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool get_all_holdings, so it is clear but lacks direct sibling distinction.

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 when the tool would be used, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_all_holdings or get_positions. There are no stated usage contexts, exclusions, or routing signals.

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