watch_drp_alert

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses nothing about side effects, required permissions, what the mutation changes, or any behavioral traits. The mutation name implies a subscription/watch operation, but no details are given.

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 a single run-on block of variable names and a partial example. It is not front-loaded or structured; it reads as a technical dump rather than a useful description.

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?

This is a complex tool with 14 parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description provides no information about return values, pagination, error conditions, or the effect of the mutation. It is wholly inadequate for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds minimal value. It lists variable names already present in the schema and shows a truncated example without explaining what each filter field means or how parameters relate to different resource types. The example is cryptic and incomplete.

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 only states 'mutation watchDRPAlert' and lists variable names, never explaining that this tool watches a DRP alert. The name itself is slightly clearer, but the description is essentially a tautology and does not differentiate from siblings like watch_drp_alerts or un_watch_drp_alert.

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?

There is no statement about when to use this tool, what problem it solves, or how it compares to alternative tools. No context is provided beyond the raw GraphQL mutation name.

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