cap_watchlists_add_market

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions 'Requires confirm when configured', which is useful, but fails to state whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on duplicate, or any permission requirements. The behavioral disclosure is insufficient.

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 concise at two sentences, but the second sentence is ambiguous. It could be restructured to front-load the primary purpose then add detail. The brevity sacrifices clarity.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema, return values are covered. However, the description omits critical context: prerequisites, error conditions, and detailed confirmation behavior. For a mutation tool with no annotations, it is incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description only vaguely hints at 'epic' as a market and 'confirm' as requiring confirmation. It does not explain 'watchlist_id' or clarify 'confirm' semantics (e.g., is it a flag to confirm or a trigger?). For a 3-parameter tool, this is inadequate.

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 'Add a market (EPIC) to a watchlist', specifying the verb and resources. It distinguishes from siblings like cap_watchlists_remove_market. The mention of 'Requires confirm when configured' adds nuance.

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 this tool versus alternatives. The description does not explain prerequisites (e.g., watchlist must exist) or when confirmation is needed. Sibling tools are listed but not referenced for differentiation.

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