Price alert

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so the description is not required to carry that burden. However, it adds nothing behavioral beyond that — no indication of error behavior for an unknown id, scoping, or return shape.

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?

A single fragment with zero waste and the key information front-loaded, but it leans toward under-specification rather than true conciseness given the tool's context.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description could have signaled what a price alert record contains. For a simple single-record retrieval with strong annotations, the terse description is minimally adequate but leaves return-shape ambiguity.

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 50%: the market enum is fully documented in the schema, while id has no description but is self-evident. The phrase 'by id' confirms id is the lookup key, adding only marginal meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (price alert) with a scope qualifier (one, by id), which distinguishes it from the sibling get_alerts list tool. It is clear but does not explicitly name the sibling or contrast behavior.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like get_alerts, and no prerequisites. The agent must infer from the name that this is the singular lookup versus the list.

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