check_watches

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, rate limits, or whether the operation is destructive. For a batch operation that re-runs searches, more details are needed to avoid unexpected consequences.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It directly conveys the tool's purpose without any filler.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is sufficient for the agent to understand the basic action. However, it could mention that results are returned or that it triggers a batch process, but the current level is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter information because there are none, which is acceptable. Baseline 4 is appropriate for no parameters.

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 verb 're-run' and the resource 'all watched searches', with the specific outcome 'report newly-found jobs'. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'watch_search' (which creates a watch) and 'list_due_follow_ups' (which lists pending actions).

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 implies immediate use ('right now') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'watch_search' or 'search_jobs'. No exclusions or context are given.

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