Catch Up On Watchlist

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the snapshot is moved forward (a state-changing side effect), that the first run only records a baseline, and that each creator checked consumes 2 orchyn credits. These are important behavioral traits the annotations alone do not convey.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the core purpose first, then explains the comparison mechanism, the first-run edge case, and the credit cost. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant wording.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations, the description fully covers the tool's scope, stateful behavior, edge cases, and cost. The agent has enough information to decide when to call it and what to expect.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, including defaults and meaning. The description adds general context about per-creator checking but does not substantially enrich the parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 identifies the verb and resource: fetching recent posts from watched creators, comparing them against a snapshot, and advancing the snapshot. It explicitly distinguishes the tool from 'what exists' queries by framing it as 'what is new', which separates it from sibling tools like get_user_posts or discover_social_posts.

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 usage context: use this when you want to catch up on new content since the last check, and it explains the first-run baseline behavior. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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