tv_alert_create

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true. The description adds 'DESTRUCTIVE: creates a real alert on your account', reinforcing the mutation and explaining the real-world impact. It also notes the dependency on the current symbol, which is not in the annotations. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, action-first structure, with the destructive warning prominently placed. There is no redundant information; every word contributes to understanding.

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 destructive annotation and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: creation, current-symbol dependency, and supported trigger types. It doesn't explain return values, but the tool is simple and the context is sufficient for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by explaining the two alert modes and example condition types ('Crossing Up/Down, Greater/Less Than'). This provides context for the condition enum beyond the raw schema descriptions.

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?

Description states 'Create an alert on the current symbol' with a specific verb and resource. It clarifies the context (current symbol) and distinguishes from sibling tools like tv_alert_delete and tv_alert_list by specifying the creation action and supported alert types.

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?

Description gives clear context on when to use: it supports simple message alerts or template-driven condition alerts, implying the two input modes. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the sibling names (e.g., tv_alert_delete, tv_alert_list) make the distinctions evident.

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