watchlist_by_name

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states it 'gets contents', implying a read operation, but lacks details on side effects, error behavior (e.g., if watchlist name doesn't exist), or permissions. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and an Args block. No wasted words. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

With an output schema present and a simple input (one scalar parameter), the description is largely adequate. However, it omits details like what happens when the watchlist is not found, and does not clarify differences from sibling tools like 'unified_watchlist_by_name'.

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 coverage is 0% (no description in schema). The description adds 'Name of the watchlist to retrieve' which clarifies the parameter purpose beyond the schema title 'Watchlist Name'. However, it is brief and adds limited value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Gets contents of a specific watchlist by name', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'all_watchlists' which lists all, and 'watchlist_performance' which suggests performance metrics.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The description implies retrieval by name, but does not mention when not to use or provide alternative tool names. Sibling tools exist but no differentiation advice.

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