watchlists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation through 'list' and 'get', but does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating, nor does it mention authentication requirements, error handling, or any side effects.

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 concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's function, with no wasted words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, output schema available), the description adequately covers the two modes of operation. It does not mention pagination or edge cases, but for a read-only list/get tool, this is sufficient.

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 description clarifies the role of watchlist_id: when present, it fetches a specific watchlist; when absent, it lists all. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, which only shows an optional string parameter with no description.

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 lists watchlists or fetches a specific one by ID, using specific verbs ('List' and 'get') and a distinct resource. This distinguishes it from the sibling mutate_watchlist, which implies modification.

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 usage is implied: providing watchlist_id retrieves one watchlist, omitting it lists all. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like mutate_watchlist, nor any conditions or prerequisites.

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