alert_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the mutation profile ('STATE_MUTATING (Creates an active alert in user account)') plus a constraint ('Requires market symbol to be active'). It omits permission/auth requirements and whether an existing alert is replaced or duplicated, but the essential side-effect is explicit.

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?

Front-loads the action, then separates WHEN TO USE, SIDE EFFECTS, and LIMITATIONS into labeled clauses – easy to scan. Slightly redundant between 'open the dialog' and 'create a server-side alert', keeping it from a 5.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies purpose, trigger conditions, side effects, and a precondition. It could say more about permissions or the returned alert handle, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents price, message, and condition. The description's parenthetical condition list mirrors the schema's own enum examples, adding little new meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('create a server-side price alert') and even the mechanism (TradingView alert configuration dialog). An agent can distinguish it from siblings alert_list and alert_delete without opening any schema.

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 'WHEN TO USE' clause explicitly scopes the tool to conditional price triggers and names the relevant conditions (crossing, greater_than, less_than). It does not name alternatives (e.g., alert_list/alert_delete) or state when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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