get_portfolio

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It reveals that the tool operates within a session and can target a specific broker, but does not disclose what happens if no active broker exists, whether authentication is required, or if it is strictly read-only. The 'Get' verb implies read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no fluff and every word contributes meaning.

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 read tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and the broker-selection context. It could be more explicit about prerequisites (e.g., active session) and the nature of 'holdings', but overall it is sufficient for basic invocation.

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% for the single parameter 'broker', meaning the schema already provides a description ('Specific broker (optional, uses active if not specified)'). The tool description adds minimal semantic value by restating this relationship, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('portfolio holdings') with a defined scope ('from active or specific broker in your session'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_consolidated_portfolio by emphasizing single-broker retrieval.

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?

It clearly indicates usage context (active broker or a specific broker via the broker parameter), which implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like get_consolidated_portfolio for multi-broker aggregation, so a slight gap exists in exclusion guidance.

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