Scan Watchlist Patterns & Confluence Ranking

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the descending AI-Confluence ranking behavior and the 25-symbol cap, but the cap duplicates the schema's maxItems and nothing is said about cost/rate behavior of scanning many symbols; the schema's 'compact' note covers token usage instead.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the operation, the batch constraint, and the sort order with no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With a full input schema, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers the essentials an agent needs to invoke the tool. The remaining gap is usage routing versus ta_scan_symbol, which is the one thing structured fields cannot supply.

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 100% across all seven parameters, so the schema already carries the semantics. The description restates only the 25-symbol limit and adds no new detail on period, timeframe, min_confidence, lookback_bars, or how ranking interacts with max_results.

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?

States a specific verb (scan), a specific resource (multiple ticker symbols in batch), a scope cap (up to 25 symbols), and the output ordering (ranked by AI Confluence Score descending). The 'multiple ... in batch' phrasing implicitly separates it from ta_scan_symbol, but the sibling is never named, so the differentiation rests on inference.

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?

Usage is only implied: the batch/watchlist framing suggests this is the tool for scanning a list of symbols at once. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no routing to ta_scan_symbol for single-symbol scans, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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