list_watches

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'active watch expressions' but doesn't clarify what 'active' means, whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires a session context, or what the output format might be. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a tool in a debugging environment.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the complexity of debugging tools and the lack of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'active' entails, how results are returned, or dependencies on session state, leaving the agent with incomplete context for proper use.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it appropriately doesn't mention any, which is correct for this tool.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all active watch expressions', making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'evaluate_watches' or 'get_variables', which might have overlapping functionality in a debugging context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'evaluate_watches' or 'get_variables'. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what prerequisites might exist.

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