get_risk_alerts

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses specific behavioral thresholds (e.g., >30% sector concentration warning), adding useful context beyond the schema. However, it could mention read-only nature or authorization requirements.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and specifics, with no extraneous information. Every word 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 a single optional parameter with a default and an existing output schema, the description covers the core behavior well. It could mention the response format briefly, but the output schema likely fills that gap.

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 only parameter, portfolio_name, has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description does not explain what the parameter expects (e.g., valid portfolio names) beyond the default value, leaving ambiguity.

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 generates risk alerts for a named portfolio and specifies three specific checks with thresholds, making its purpose distinct from sibling tools.

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 portfolio risk assessment but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_portfolio_risk_dashboard or get_position_risk_check.

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