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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It adds useful details—the operation is a list (implying read-only) and is free—but it does not disclose pagination, return contents, rate limits, or authentication requirements beyond the token.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence plus a cost note. Every clause earns its place and nothing is buried or redundant.

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 list tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers how to invoke it but leaves gaps about what is returned, whether results are paginated, and how canceled watches appear. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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?

There is one required parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that the owner_token is returned when the watch was created, which adds meaning beyond the schema's pattern, but it does not clarify token handling, security, or format beyond what the regex implies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: "List watches." It also scopes the operation to an owner token and notes the cost, making the purpose clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like cancel_watch or watch_parcel.

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 phrase "owner token returned when the watch was created" implies the tool is used after creating a watch, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives or mention exclusions. Usage is therefore implied rather than guided.

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