Watchlists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds what is returned (instruments with tickers and asset ids), but says nothing about auth requirements, pagination, or behavior on an empty watchlist set.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the resource, no filler or restated title boilerplate. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with full annotation coverage and a fully described single parameter, the description covers what the tool does and roughly what comes back. It stops short of noting the market scoping interaction or empty-result behavior, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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 100% and the single market parameter is fully documented with its enum values and defaults in the schema. The description contributes no additional meaning about market scoping, so the baseline of 3 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('All custom watchlists of the Thndr account') and even names the payload fields returned (tickers, asset ids). It is clearly a plural listing tool, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the singular sibling get_watchlist, leaving that distinction to inference.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing guidance. With siblings get_watchlist, create_watchlist, edit_watchlist and delete_watchlist in the same namespace, the description gives no help on which to pick; the word 'All' is the only implicit signal.

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