List deployable strategies

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description adds key behavioral context: this is the global catalog of what COULD be deployed, not what is account-specific. It also clarifies the meaning of the returned `id` with a deployment instruction, preventing misinterpretation.

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 composed of two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the main action, then providing caveat and alternative, then a deployment tip. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no parameters, an output schema present, and annotations confirming safe read-only behavior, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, scope, and usage context. It even includes a helpful cross-reference and usage tip, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers them (vacuously). The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. No additional parameter semantics are required.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'every strategy (expert advisor) available to deploy on Senti Quant', with specific attributes (symbols, timeframes, rating, presets). It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool list_account_strategies, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (platform-wide catalog of deployable strategies) and when not to (not currently running on an account), and names the alternative list_account_strategies. It also provides a concrete usage hint: 'Use `id` as `eaDefinitionId` when deploying.'

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