fleet_watch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the important behavioral trait that watching pins a pool connection slot for the duration, which is beyond the schema. It could add more about buffer limits or lifecycle, but the key side effect is conveyed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main verbs, and no filler. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and a critical side effect.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and a key behavioral caveat, but lacks definition for most parameters. The presence of an output schema helps with returns, yet the tool's 5-parameter complexity demands more parameter-level explanation.

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%, and the description only explains the 'action' parameter in prose. The 'fleet', 'resource', 'addresses', and 'debounce_s' parameters are not described at all, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and constraints.

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 specific verbs: subscribe, unsubscribe, and poll for a resource across a fleet. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fleet_read and fleet_write by focusing on watching/notification behavior.

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?

Provides clear context on the three action modes and explicitly mentions a resource-consumption tradeoff (pinning a pool connection slot). No explicit exclusions or alternatives are named, but the guidance is sufficient for basic usage scenarios.

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