create_watchlist
Create a named account watchlist. Free.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Watchlist name. |
signals
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- Added
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (readOnlyHint=false) already indicate this is a write operation, and the description's 'Create' aligns with that. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as permissions, side effects, or rate limits. 'Free' is irrelevant to behavior. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing of value.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise (two short phrases) and front-loaded with the purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or filler content. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple 1-parameter creation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate. It conveys the core purpose and the key qualifier 'account.' It could mention success behavior or prerequisites, but given the minimal complexity and full schema coverage, it is nearly complete. A small gap is the lack of mention that this is a distinct setup step before using add_to_watchlist, but that belongs to usage guidelines.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% (the 'name' parameter is described as 'Watchlist name.'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema already fully documents the parameter.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Create') and the resource ('a named account watchlist'), which is a specific verb+resource pairing. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_to_watchlist or get_watchlist by indicating it creates the watchlist itself, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'Free' but that is not usage guidance. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a clearly distinct resource or action: event types (acquisitions, funding_events, exec_moves), entities (companies, investors), and watchlist operations. The watchlist CRUD commands are separated by function, and company_timeline is clearly scoped to a single company's full history.
Naming Consistency4/5
Watchlist tools consistently use verb_noun (create_watchlist, get_watchlist, add_to_watchlist), while data lookup tools use plural nouns describing the returned entity or event (companies, investors, funding_events). The mixed convention is readable and predictable, with only company_timeline deviating from both patterns.
Tool Count5/5
With 11 tools, the server is well-scoped for its domain: company/event data search plus watchlist management. Each tool has a defined role and the count feels neither sparse nor bloated.
Completeness4/5
The toolset covers the core domain well: company and investor search, major event types, company timelines, and full watchlist membership management. A notable minor gap is the absence of a delete_watchlist tool, since create/list/get/add/remove exist for watchlists.