Add Price Alert

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it 'Returns created alert object', which is helpful. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like duplicate alerts or rate limits, though annotations partially cover the behavioral profile.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides the essential parameter details in a structured, scannable format.

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?

With 4 parameters, no nesting, and no output schema, the description covers the tool's core usage adequately. It could benefit from noting that the alert object is returned (already mentioned) or mentioning any implicit defaults, but overall it provides sufficient context for agent invocation.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by clarifying the four allowed condition values ('price_rise', 'price_fall', etc.) and their semantic distinction (absolute vs relative), as well as frequency options ('once', 'daily', 'every'). This goes beyond the schema's minimal 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Add' and the resource 'price alert', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like alert_delete, alert_disable, etc., by focusing solely on creation.

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 explains valid values for condition and frequency parameters, helping the agent understand how to configure the alert. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tools (e.g., alert_list lists, alert_delete removes), but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention prerequisites like an existing alert session.

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