alert_create

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only discloses the mutation and the current-symbol dependency; it does not mention prerequisites (an active chart), side effects, idempotency, or possible failures, which are important for a create operation with no output schema.

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 no filler or repetition. It conveys the action, target, scope, and mechanism economically.

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 simple create tool with three documented parameters, the core object is clear. Still, the absence of annotations and output schema leaves success/error behavior and preconditions undeclared, so the definition is adequate but not fully complete for an agent invoking it autonomously.

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%, and each parameter has its own description, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description adds useful context about current chart symbol and the TradingView alert API, but it does not enrich the meaning of price, condition, or message beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Create'), a specific resource ('a price alert'), and a scoping constraint ('on the current chart symbol'). This clearly separates it from alert_list and alert_delete while also distinguishing it from data/replay tools.

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 context is clear: this is for creating a new alert tied to the currently displayed symbol. However, the description does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as alert_list/alert_delete for managing existing alerts, so the routing guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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