Add a CanadaBuys or Alberta APC opportunity to your persistent watchlist, with an optional note.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| note | No | Optional note, e.g. 'waiting on bonding quote' | |
| reference | Yes | Reference number to track |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It mentions 'persistent watchlist' and 'optional note', but fails to disclose what happens on duplicate adds, if notes are editable, or any watchlist limits.
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 a single sentence of 14 words, highly concise with no redundant information.
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 add-to-list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It omits success indication, but semantics are clear given sibling tools provide context.
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 coverage is 100% and the description adds minimal extra meaning, only clarifying the note is optional. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as it does not enrich parameter understanding significantly.
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 specifies the action 'Add', the resource 'CanadaBuys or Alberta APC opportunity', and the destination 'persistent watchlist'. It distinguishes from siblings like list_watchlist and unwatch_opportunity.
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 tracking opportunities via watchlist, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid, nor mention alternatives like unwatch_opportunity or list_watchlist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
