watchlist_add

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that the tool independently verifies membership, name, and order after the append.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with a clear action and verification clause. It contains no redundant or wasted language.

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 mutation tool with rich schema descriptions and annotations, the description covers the core action and post-write verification. Critical prerequisites like target_id and expected_layout_id are delegated to the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 high at 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters in detail. The description mentions exact symbols/sections and watchlist IDs but adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: append one exact symbol or section to a watchlist ID. It implicitly distinguishes single-entry addition from bulk operations via 'one exact,' but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as watchlist_add_bulk or watchlist_set_entries.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives. An agent must infer from 'one exact' that this is for single additions rather than bulk or replacement operations.

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