list_triggers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return content (armed/fired triggers with baselines and fire times), which implies a read-only operation, but it omits permissions, pagination, ordering, and side-effect details.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core purpose and return content efficiently.

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 and no annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete. It explains what is returned but does not address parameter semantics, filtering, pagination, or how it relates to sibling tools.

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 0% for the single required parameter, trader_id. The description only says 'for a trader' and does not name the parameter or explain its expected format, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 states a specific verb+resource: list all triggers for a trader, and clarifies the trigger states and returned details. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling check_triggers, leaving some ambiguity about when this tool is preferred.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as check_triggers, set_trigger, or cancel_trigger. Usage is only weakly implied by the word 'List'.

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