create_price_alert

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the action (create alert) and the requirement for an API key, but does not mention side effects (e.g., duplicate alerts) or rate limits. For a mutation tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 unnecessary words. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value: action, parameters, constraints, and auth requirement. Highly efficient.

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 3 parameters, 100% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essentials but lacks details on return values or success/failure behavior. It is minimally complete for a simple creation tool but could be improved.

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 schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds critical context that at least one of decreasePct or increasePct must be supplied, which is not encoded in the required fields (only cardId is required). This clarifies the tool's business logic 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 tool creates a price alert for a card. It specifies the required parameters (increasePct, decreasePct, or both) and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_price_alerts, delete_price_alert, and update_price_alert.

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 provides clear guidance: supply increasePct, decreasePct, or both (Premium) with at least one threshold required. It also notes the need for IWMM_API_KEY. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, the context is clear for an alert creation tool.

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