create_watch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it says nothing about side effects, auth requirements, duplicate-URL handling, or whether the watch starts active or paused. The paused/interval defaults live only in the schema, so the description adds almost no behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and zero waste. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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?

The output schema exists, so return-value explanation is correctly omitted, and all parameters are covered by the schema. However, for an unannotated mutation tool the description is thin on behavior and routing, leaving an agent without enough to call it confidently in edge cases.

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 100% and every parameter is self-documented (url, tag, title, paused, minutes_between_checks), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no format, constraint, or default detail beyond what is already structured.

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 verb and resource ('Create a new URL watch') plus the resource's purpose ('monitor for changes'). Clear enough that an agent distinguishes it from update_watch/delete_watch, but it offers no explicit differentiation from sibling create tools like create_tag.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. Nothing tells the agent when to create a watch versus using list_watches/search_watches or how this relates to create_tag. Usage is only inferred from the name.

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