Get eToro holdings breakdown

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

The description explicitly labels the operation as '(read-only)', which is a key behavioral disclosure given the absence of annotations. It also discloses that results are grouped by instrument and lists the exact fields returned, providing behavioral context beyond the tool name and schema.

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, dense sentence that states the verb, resource, grouping behavior, and returned metrics without redundancy. Every element adds value.

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) and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately communicates the return contents and behavior. It covers the grouping, the specific fields, and the read-only nature, making it sufficiently complete for an AI agent to invoke correctly.

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, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. According to the rubric, zero-param tools receive a baseline of 4, and the description has no need to explain parameters.

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 'Returns' and identifies the resource as 'open positions grouped by instrument' with detailed metrics (invested amount, current value, P&L, P&L%, portfolio weight %). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like etoro_portfolio_summary or etoro_raw_pnl, which serve different purposes.

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 to use the tool (when you need a holdings breakdown), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not conditions. For example, it doesn't state 'use etoro_portfolio_summary for overall portfolio totals' or 'use etoro_raw_pnl for transaction-level P&L.' This is implied but not explicit.

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