register_brand_audit_watch

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

Annotations are readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, etc. Description adds that each run enqueues a brand_audit_batch_start and POSTs a webhook on drift, and returns a watchId. This adds side-effect details beyond annotations without contradiction.

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?

Four sentences front-loading main action, then side effects, return value, and constraints. No wasted words; well-organized and scannable.

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?

Covers creation, cadence, side effects, webhook behavior, output, and constraints (owner-scoped, max 20). Missing authentication details but those are likely global. Adequate for a creation tool with moderate 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?

Schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions. Description complements by explaining webhook URL behavior (POSTed on drift, SSRF validation) and output (return watchId). Adds value without redundancy.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a recurring brand-audit watch with specific cadence options. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_brand_audit_watches and brand_audit_single by focusing on recurring setup, side effects, and constraints.

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?

Description indicates when to use (recurring monitoring) and notes owner-scoping and a cap of 20 active watches. It does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives, but the context from siblings and the clear purpose makes usage clear.

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