watch_complexes

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

With no annotations, description should cover behavioral traits. It mentions comparison to previous snapshot, which is useful. However, it does not explain prerequisites (how 'interest complexes' are defined) or potential limitations like rate limits or required authentication.

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, front-loaded with main purpose, and no extraneous information. Each sentence contributes essential information about outputs and comparison feature.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Description addresses listings, prices, transactions, and diff. However, it omits details about the snapshot mechanism (how it is created or maintained), which is relevant for full usage completeness.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not elaborate on parameter usage or formats.

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 clearly states the tool queries listings, market prices, and actual transaction prices for interest complexes, distinguishing it from siblings like get_complex_price_info or get_complex_info. It also mentions returning diff data compared to previous snapshot, adding unique value.

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 explains what the tool returns but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It implies comprehensive coverage but lacks exclusionary guidance or context for when not to use.

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