search_portfolio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the search action, offering no information about match behavior (e.g., partial vs exact), case sensitivity, output format, or ordering. This is insufficient for an agent to predict tool behavior.

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 directly states the core function. It avoids any filler or repetition, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

While the schema is detailed, the description lacks crucial context such as what specific data is searchable, what 'content' means, and what the response format will be. The presence of sibling tools helps infer the overall domain, but the description alone does not fully prepare an agent to invoke the tool 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 input schema provides complete descriptions for all three parameters, so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It does map 'keywords, category, or content' to query and category, which provides a slight semantic bridge. The limit parameter is self-explanatory from its schema default.

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's function with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Srikanth's portfolio data'), plus the search dimensions ('keywords, category, or content'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_portfolio_item or get_portfolio_categories, which imply direct retrieval rather than search.

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 usage for searching when the exact item is unknown, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidelines provided, so the agent must infer from the tool name and context that this is for broad searches, not specific lookups.

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