alert_list

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden and does a solid job by declaring 'SIDE EFFECTS: None (Read-only)' and a scope limitation ('Reads alerts visible in alerts dock'). It could say more about the shape of returned alerts, but the safety profile is disclosed.

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?

Three labeled sections with zero filler; the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the WHEN TO USE, SIDE EFFECTS and LIMITATIONS labels. 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, side effects and visibility limits adequately. It lacks detail on the returned alert fields, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already implies.

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 uses a specific verb (List) and resource (alerts), and adds scope ('active and triggered alerts from the TradingView alerts panel'). It is clearly distinguishable from alert_create and alert_delete by its read/list nature, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 gives clear context: inspect active triggers or verify created alerts. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not conditions (e.g., use alert_create to add one), so it is good but not exhaustive.

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