tcg_watchlist_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so safety is clear. Description adds only that a horizon filter is optional, missing behavioral details like pagination, default open_only, or that it returns a list. Minimal added value.

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 sentence of 6 words is extremely concise with no wasted words. Front-loaded key information. However, lacks detail but achieves 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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. But the tool has four parameters (horizon, open_only, limit, offset) and the description only addresses one. For a list tool with pagination and filtering, this is incomplete. Annotations cover safety but not parameter semantics.

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 description must compensate. It only mentions 'horizon filter', ignoring open_only, limit, and offset parameters. The schema itself lacks descriptions for most fields except open_only. The tool's description fails to explain key 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?

Description clearly states the tool lists watchlist entries with an optional horizon filter, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from siblings like tcg_watchlist_get (single entry) and tcg_watchlist_add, but could be more explicit about the scope.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tcg_watchlist_get or tcg_watchlist_search (not listed but possibly exists). Implied usage from name but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use.

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