Update Watchlist Group

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it returns upstream API response but does not disclose reversibility, auth requirements, or side effects beyond the obvious modifications.

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 sentences, no fluff, front-loads the key information. Every word earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a standard update tool with good schema and annotations. However, lacks guidance on usage context, edge cases, or detailed return format beyond 'upstream API response'. Would benefit from example or error handling notes.

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 all 4 parameters. Description adds context: name for rename, securities with mode for modifying securities, and clarifies mode options (add, remove, replace).

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?

Description clearly states it updates a watchlist group by id, with options to rename or modify securities using modes (add/remove/replace). Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_watchlist_group and delete_watchlist_group.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, nor alternatives. However, as a standard update operation, usage context is implicit. Lacks guidance on prerequisites or conflicts.

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