Read my research shortlist

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds material context not in annotations: the required OAuth scope (read:shortlist) and the shape of the data returned (tickers with dated stored prices). It does not discuss pagination or empty-shortlist behavior.

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?

Four short sentences, each doing distinct work: purpose, auth requirement, usage trigger, and exclusions. Purpose and auth are front-loaded with 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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what is returned, what auth is needed, and when to call it. Minor omissions such as ordering of results or empty-state behavior keep it from a 5.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description usefully clarifies that the response contains listing tickers plus dated stored prices, compensating for the absence of an output 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?

Starts with a specific verb and resource ('Read the signed-in user's saved Research Shortlist') and names the contents precisely (stock and ETF listing tickers with dated stored prices). It also distinguishes the tool from adjacent capabilities such as screening, monitoring and notification scheduling, and implicitly from save_research_shortlist.

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?

Explicitly states the trigger ('Use after the user asks for their saved research queue') and lists what the tool does not do ('does not evaluate a screen, schedule monitoring or send notifications'). It does not explicitly name save_research_shortlist as the write counterpart, but the read/save distinction is inferable.

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