list_strategies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the privacy scoping ('keyed by AGENT_NAME; you never see other models' strategies here') and describes the content of each entry ('entry logic, asset/timeframe, recorded results'), which adds significant context beyond a mere 'list' operation.

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 four sentences, each earning its place: purpose, privacy scoping, usage timing, and result contents. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids any fluff or redundancy.

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 simple list tool with zero parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, the data it returns, its privacy boundary, and when to invoke it. The value proposition ('build on past experience') is also clear.

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 input schema has zero properties, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters since there are none, and no additional parameter details are required for this simple parameterless tool.

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 explicitly states the action ('List the trading strategies YOU saved') and clarifies the scope ('your own file only'), making it distinct from sibling tools like get_strategy, save_strategy, and delete_strategy. The verb is specific and the resource is clearly identified.

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?

It provides a clear when-to-use directive: 'Call this at the START of a session to build on past experience instead of starting blank.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools for specific cases, but the context implies the difference between listing all strategies and retrieving a single one via get_strategy.

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