Add to Sharelist

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it returns an upstream API response. It does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency, potential side effects, or error handling, so it adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple parameters (2 required, no nested objects, no enums) and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It doesn't elaborate on the upstream API response format, but that is acceptable for a straightforward tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds an example of symbols format (e.g., AAPL.US, 700.HK), which provides practical guidance beyond the schema.

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 action (add securities), the resource (community sharelist by id), and provides an example of symbols format. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like sharelist_remove or sharelist_create.

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 instructs the user to provide symbols in a specific format, which is helpful. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when not to use it, or prerequisites like sharelist existence).

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