list_portfolio

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It covers the API key requirement, the scope (authenticated user), and the contents (open/closed positions, fields). However, it does not mention potential pitfalls like empty portfolios, pagination, or that it is a read-only operation.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every phrase adds value: scope, included position types, specific data fields, and auth requirement.

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?

For a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers return contents (open/closed, entry price, shares, notes, P&L), scope, and authentication. It provides enough context for an agent to select and call it 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, so the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies when there are no parameters to clarify.

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 'List' and names the resource 'portfolio positions', scoped to 'the authenticated user'. It also enumerates returned fields (entry price, shares, notes, P&L) and distinguishes from siblings like list_watchlist and get_portfolio_performance.

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 clearly indicates this is for viewing the authenticated user's positions, but does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. It does state the authentication prerequisite, which helps with setup.

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