Check eToro connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly notes 'read-only', which is a key safety trait, and mentions the listing behavior. It doesn't discuss error handling or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter connectivity check, 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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary purpose ('Verifies'), followed by a secondary behavior. Every word earns its place, with no repetition of the schema or redundant phrasing.

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 tool's simplicity—no parameters, no output schema, and no annotation complexity—the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: what it verifies, that it's read-only, and what additional information it returns. It is complete for its intended scope.

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?

No parameters exist, so the schema is automatically 100% covered. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4; the description doesn't need to add parameter meaning. It correctly stays focused on behavior rather than inventing param details.

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 a specific verb ('Verifies') and names the resource ('configured eToro API key'), plus the additional action of listing agent-portfolios. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like etoro_portfolio_summary or etoro_holdings, which focus on data retrieval rather than connection verification.

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 the tool is for checking API connectivity and lists agent-portfolios as a read-only side effect. It doesn't explicitly state when to use this instead of siblings, but the unique purpose (verification) makes the context clear. Slight deduction for not naming an alternative or exclusion scenario.

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