update_watchlist_by_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by explicitly disclosing the destructive behavior: replacing the entire watchlist and removing all assets if symbols are omitted. It does not cover reversibility or permissions, but the critical behavioral risk is clearly communicated.

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 compact: one sentence states the purpose and a second delivers the critical warning. There is no redundant information, and the formatting with 'IMPORTANT' effectively highlights the key behavior.

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 simple nature and the existence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the main risk (data loss via replacement) and provides all necessary operational context, making it sufficient for safe invocation.

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 description adds crucial meaning beyond the schema by explaining that symbols, though not required in the schema, are effectively mandatory for a meaningful update and must include the full desired list. This clarifies the parameter's role and consequence, exceeding the schema's baseline.

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 updates an existing watchlist with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, delete, add, and remove, especially by highlighting the replace-all semantics.

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 provides strong usage guidance by warning that the entire watchlist is replaced and that the symbols parameter must contain the full list. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over add/remove alternatives, but the replacement semantics imply the appropriate use case.

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