Get Position by Contract ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the return fields but does not disclose additional behavioral context such as what happens if the position is not found or how the default account is used when accountId is omitted.

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-loaded with the purpose, and no redundant or extraneous content. Every phrase 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?

For a simple read-only tool with good annotations and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers what it does and what it returns. Lack of an output schema is compensated by listing return fields. No major gaps for a 'get by ID' operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing clear definitions for both conid and accountId. The tool description only restates conid's role and does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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?

Clear verb 'Get' with specific resource 'specific position' by contract ID. The description lists return fields, making it distinct from the sibling get_positions which likely retrieves all positions.

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 use for single position lookup by conid, but it does not explicitly state when to use this vs get_positions or mention any exclusions. No explicit alternatives or when-not guidance is provided.

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