aiwatcher_monitor_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', which is already implied by the tool name, and does not mention return format, authentication, side effects, or any other behavioral details.

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 concise sentence with no filler words, making it easy to parse. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful context, though conciseness itself is not penalized.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, this minimal description leaves the agent without critical context such as what the settings represent, how they relate to other monitor tools, or what the response contains. The presence of overlapping sibling tools heightens the need for more context.

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 provides 100% coverage for all three parameters (id, body, query) with clear descriptions, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no extra parameter information, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and names the resource 'AI Search Watcher monitor settings', making the core action clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'aiwatcher_monitor_detail', which likely also retrieves monitor-related information, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'aiwatcher_monitor_detail' or 'aiwatcher_update_monitor_settings'. The description simply states what it does without any context for selection.

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