watchlist.add

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that watched wallets are monitored for trades when the monitor is running, which is helpful. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., duplicates, overwrites), error conditions, or authentication requirements, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the action and resource. It avoids redundant details. Slightly more structure (e.g., separating add from remove) could improve readability, but it remains efficient.

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 simplicity (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides sufficient purpose and a usage hint. However, it omits return value details, error handling, or verification steps, which would help an agent fully utilize the tool.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, with clear descriptions for address, alias, and action. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level information beyond the schema. Given high schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 adds or removes an Ethereum wallet address from the copy trading watchlist, specifying the resource and actions. While it covers both add and remove, it does not explicitly differentiate between them beyond referencing the action parameter, and the sibling tools watchlist.list and watchlist.rebalance are distinct enough.

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 a clear usage guideline by recommending using discover_traders first to find good wallets. It also mentions that monitored wallets are watched when the monitor is running, giving context. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternatives.

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