hotlist_get

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

Annotations already establish read-only, open-world, non-destructive behavior. The description usefully adds that the endpoint is credential-free, the data is US-focused, and results are capped at 20 rows. It does not explain return shape, but for a read tool with annotations this is solid added context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every sentence adds useful information and there is 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?

The description tells an agent what the tool reads and its row cap, but with no output schema it does not describe what a row contains, nor does it mention error conditions. It is adequate for selecting the tool but incomplete for interpreting results.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies that 'preset' is a fixed public hotlist selection and that 'limit' cannot exceed 20 rows, but it does not explain the individual preset enum values or the default limit.

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 definition states a specific verb and resource: read a fixed US TradingView public hotlist preset. The scope is clear enough to distinguish it from general scanner tools, though the term 'hotlist' is somewhat jargon-y and no sibling is named.

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?

It gives implementation context ('credential-free scanner preset endpoint') but no explicit guidance on when to choose this over screener_scan or other market-data siblings. There are no exclusions or alternative-tool routing.

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