Add to Sharelist

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and destructiveHint=false, but the description only adds that it returns the upstream API response. It does not disclose behavior like duplicate handling, permission requirements, or side effects beyond the annotation baseline.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose and method, second provides example and return info. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key action verb 'add'.

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?

For a simple add operation with two required params and no output schema, the description covers what it does, what to provide, and return type. Additional context (e.g., append vs. overwrite) would be nice but is not critical.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds an example for symbols format, which is helpful but not critical since the schema already specifies 'array of strings'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 adds securities to a community sharelist by ID, which distinguishes it from siblings like sharelist_remove (remove) and sharelist_create (create). It provides a concrete example of symbols format.

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 implies usage for adding securities to an existing sharelist but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., sharelist_remove). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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