Setell trade playbooks

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by clarifying that playbooks are 'behavior starter-configs' and emphasizing they 'never prices.' This contextual detail helps the agent understand the scope. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description complements rather than contradicts.

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 two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded. Every word adds value: it specifies what playbooks are, that they never contain prices, and that it also reports the applied playbook. There is no redundancy or wasted text.

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?

The description conveys the main functionality and hints at the output (list of playbooks and which one is applied). However, it lacks explicit details about the output format (e.g., whether it returns IDs, names, or structured objects). Given no output schema, a slightly more detailed description would improve completeness.

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 parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The description correctly handles this by not adding any parameter information. Since schema coverage is 100% (no params), the baseline is high, and the description is appropriate.

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 it lists curated trade playbooks and indicates which one is applied. It distinguishes itself from the sibling setell_apply_playbook by saying 'Use before setell_apply_playbook.' The verb 'List' and resource 'Setell's curated trade playbooks' are specific and unambiguous.

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 description explicitly says 'Use before setell_apply_playbook,' providing clear guidance on when to use this tool. It also declares it as read-only, indicating it's safe and non-destructive. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other purposes.

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