tab_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses side effects ('None (Read-only)') and scope limitations ('Operates across TradingView Desktop tabs'). It could add a note on whether the list reflects only the active window or ordering guarantees, so it is not exhaustive.

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 front-loaded sentences plus labeled WHEN TO USE / SIDE EFFECTS / LIMITATIONS sections. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description reasonably names the returned fields, and it covers safety and scope for a zero-param read tool. Minor gaps remain around result ordering and multi-window behavior, but nothing critical for correct invocation.

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 schema-side burden is nil and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument call and instead describes the shape of the result, which is the useful detail here.

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 ('List all open TradingView desktop application tabs') and enumerates the returned fields (index, title, active focus status). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings tab_new, tab_close, and tab_switch.

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 says to call it before managing tabs in order to locate tab indices, which gives real selection context. It does not name a specific alternative or state a when-not condition, so it stops 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.