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

Annotations already cover the read-only and non-destructive nature of the tool. The description adds 'resolved company members' as a return detail but 'Free.' is vague and adds little behavioral context. No contradiction with annotations.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The standalone 'Free.' sentence is ambiguous and arguably unnecessary, but overall the description avoids fluff and is easy to parse.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup, the description is reasonably complete with annotations covering safety. It clarifies the return content ('resolved company members'), which is useful since no output schema exists.

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 schema already documents the single parameter 'id' with description 'Watchlist id,' giving 100% coverage. The description does not add significant parameter semantics beyond implying a single watchlist is fetched.

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 and resource: 'Return one watchlist with its resolved company members.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_watchlists (plural) and add_to_watchlist/remove_from_watchlist (mutations).

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 retrieving a specific watchlist by ID, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or provide any exclusions. The context is clear but guidance is minimal.

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