Save a screen

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond purpose: it never says what happens when the name already exists (the idempotent hint implies upsert/overwrite, but that is left to inference), whether saved screens are scoped per user, or what is returned on save.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with zero filler. Nothing redundant relative to the title.

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?

The tool takes a large nested filters object and has no output schema, so the description should ideally say what a save returns (an id, a name) and how saved screens relate to list_saved_screens. None of that is present, leaving the agent to infer the persistence contract.

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?

Top-level schema description coverage is 0% for name, filters and description, and the tool text mentions neither the 80-character name limit nor that an optional description exists. Nested filter properties happen to be well documented inside the schema, but the description contributes no meaning of its own for any of the three required/optional parameters.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Save search filters under a name') and immediately ties it to the sibling that consumes the result ('run_saved_screen'). An agent can distinguish it from search_markets or list_saved_screens without opening any schema.

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 tells the agent the downstream purpose: filters saved here are replayed with run_saved_screen, which implies when to prefer this over repeated ad-hoc searching. It stops short of a true exclusion rule (e.g., when to just call search_markets instead of persisting).

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