List Saved Sites

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

The description discloses critical behavior beyond what annotations provide: it requires a free key, and a keyless call returns auth_required rather than an empty list, with a clear call to action to use claim_free_key first. It also details the return payload structure including live deltas, verdict changes, and a portfolio summary, adding substantial context about side effects like alert status and movement flags. This aligns with the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations.

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 dense and long but every clause serves a purpose: auth prerequisite, example use cases, parameter detail, return fields, and exclusions. It is front-loaded with the critical key requirement, though it could be slightly trimmed without losing value. Not a 5 due to length, but not wastefully verbose.

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's complexity, the description covers all essential aspects: authentication requirements, keyless behavior, usage scenarios, the single parameter, detailed return contents (deltas, verdicts, portfolio flags), and clear exclusions with alternative tools. The output schema exists, but the description enriches understanding of what the data means operationally, making the tool fully self-contained.

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 schema description already fully covers the 'since' parameter, including allowed values ("24h"/"7d"/ISO), default (7d), and the suggestion to pass a cached generated_at timestamp. The description only reiterates this information without adding new semantic meaning, so the baseline 3 for high schema coverage 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists saved sites for the user's per-account shortlist, with explicit example queries and a scope of 'in-chat read-back'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming save_site and export_dataset as alternatives for adding sites or downloading files.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when a user asks to see or review their saved DC Hub shortlist in-chat, or wants to know what moved on it.' It also states when not to use it: 'Do NOT use to add a site (use save_site) or to download the list as a file (use export_dataset).'

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