my_watchlist

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact beyond them — results come back in list order — and documents pagination mechanics, but says nothing about auth requirements, empty-watchlist behavior, or whether ordering is user-customizable.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the core contract, followed by a compact Args block for the two parameters. No filler, though the docstring-style formatting is slightly verbose relative to the single sentence of real content.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and the cursor/next_cursor loop is covered. Still missing for a paginated list tool: whether the watchlist can be empty, whether ordering is fixed, and any hint about page-size limits or cost of large limits.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and largely does: limit is 'how many per page' and cursor is explicitly 'next_cursor from the previous page', which ties the input to the output field an agent must feed back. Defaults (50, null) are only in the schema, which keeps this from a 5.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: the titles on the configured user's watchlist, returned in list order. An agent can distinguish this from my_ratings, my_rating_stats, or get_list by the resource named, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource name — fetch the authenticated user's watchlist — with no explicit when-to-use or when-not conditions and no named alternatives. The pagination args hint at a browse workflow but the description never states it.

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