get_institution_portfolio_analyticsRetrieve sector allocation and top holdings analytics for an institution's portfolio by providing its SEC CIK number.
Get sector allocation and top holdings analytics for an institution's portfolio by CIK.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cik | Yes | SEC CIK number of the institution |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds context about the output (sector allocation, top holdings) but does not elaborate on other behavioral traits like data freshness, pagination, or limits. It is consistent with annotations, but no additional behavioral details are provided.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. No extraneous words or redundant information.
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 presence of an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose. It is a simple lookup with one parameter, so the description is sufficient. However, a slightly more detailed description of the analytics (e.g., typical fields returned) would be helpful but not necessary.
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%, and the description mentions 'by CIK', but the schema already defines the 'cik' parameter with a description. The description adds no meaningful semantic value beyond the schema, so 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 clearly states the tool retrieves sector allocation and top holdings analytics for an institution's portfolio, identified by CIK. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('sector allocation and top holdings analytics'), distinguishing it from similar sibling tools like get_institution_holdings.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling tools related to institutions (e.g., get_institution_holdings, get_institution_position_changes), but no scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.