Get watchlists

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

The description states 'Auto-creates a default 'My Tickers' list if none exists yet,' which is a write-side effect. However, annotations set readOnlyHint=true, indicating no state changes. This is a direct contradiction, misleading the agent about the tool's mutability. Per instructions, score is 1 due to annotation contradiction.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful: first defines output, second explains side-effect and usage, third links to sibling tools. No wasted words. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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 no output schema, the description explains what is returned (lists, tickers, plan limit) and mentions auto-creation. It covers the key aspects for a list retrieval tool. Could mention response format or pagination, but adequate for the complexity.

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 no parameters (0 params, 100% coverage). The description adds value by noting the absence of required inputs, which is sufficient. Baseline 3 is appropriate; score 4 reflects that description handles the no-param case well without needing elaboration.

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 returns all ticker lists (watchlists) for the authenticated user, including tickers and plan limit. The verb 'returns' and resource 'ticker lists' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like edgaralert_add_ticker_to_list (adds) and edgaralert_remove_ticker_from_list (removes) by focusing on retrieval.

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 explicitly says to use this tool to find listId for add/remove operations and to check current tracking. It also mentions the default watchlist is used by other tools with scope='watchlist'. While no explicit when-not-to-use is given, the use cases are clear and actionable.

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