mt4_ea_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states 'Read-only (parses the terminal's chart files)', which signals safety and non-destructiveness. This suffices for a listing tool, though it does not cover failure modes or prerequisites.

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 extremely concise, using two short paragraphs and a single line for the parameter. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown), so the description need not explain return values. It covers the two usage modes (single vs all), states read-only behavior, and explains the parameter. While it lacks details on error handling or prerequisites, it is sufficient for a simple list tool with one parameter.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining the 'terminal' parameter: 'a terminal id, or 'all' (default)' and clarifies that 'all' yields counts. However, it does not specify the format of a terminal ID or provide examples, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool lists expert advisors (strategies) attached to terminals. It distinguishes behavior for a single terminal (list each EA) vs 'all' (shows count per terminal). This differentiates it from sibling tools like mt4_control or mt4_deploy, which perform actions rather than listing.

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 implies when to use the tool (to see attached EAs) and how the parameter affects output, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings. The behavior is clear enough for most use cases.

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