add_to_watchlist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action but does not disclose behavior such as what happens if the watchlist doesn't exist, duplicate symbols, or limits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with one sentence and a list of args. It gets straight to the point with no unnecessary information, making it efficient.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description lacks behavioral context, usage guidance, and any notes on prerequisites or side effects. An agent would need additional context to use this tool correctly.

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 provides minimal parameter descriptions ('Name of the watchlist', 'List of stock symbols to add'), which largely paraphrase the parameter names. With 0% schema coverage, it adds limited meaning beyond the schema's property names.

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 action: 'Adds symbols to a watchlist.' It specifies the verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'unified_add_to_watchlist', leaving ambiguity about differences.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'unified_add_to_watchlist' or 'remove_from_watchlist'. The description simply repeats the purpose without context or exclusions.

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