Watch project

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

Adds context beyond annotations: buyer is not notified, already-watched calls are no-ops (reinforcing idempotentHint with concrete semantics), and the account-scoped nature of the adding. Missing auth requirements or failure modes, but the annotation set is already rich.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and purpose, followed by behavior and then navigation pointers. No filler.

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?

One-param mutation tool with full annotations but no output schema; the description covers purpose, notification side effect, idempotence semantics, and sibling routing. Only return-value/error behavior is unaddressed, which is minor here.

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 100% and the single parameter is documented with a useful note about sourcing it from search_projects or the URL. The description itself adds nothing param-specific, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Add a project to this account's watchlist'), plus a concrete user-facing alias (Favourite Jobs / 'the heart on the project page'). Clearly distinguished from siblings list_watchlist and unwatch_project by name.

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?

Explicitly states what happens when already watched ('changes nothing') and names the read/remove siblings for alternative intent. No explicit prerequisites or exclusions beyond that, but the when-to-use is clear.

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