changedetection_import_watches

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

Annotations already declare this is not read-only, not idempotent, open-world, and not destructive. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: it specifies the POST endpoint, text/plain body, and the important dry-run behavior when confirm is omitted.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The dry-run constraint is stated clearly, and implementation details are kept brief.

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?

For a 12-parameter bulk mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, endpoint format, optional fields, and dry-run preview. It leaves some parameter details to the schema, which is reasonable given the schema's 75% coverage.

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 75%, so most parameters are already documented. The description adds only high-level hints that tag, processor, and other watch fields can be set, and that confirm controls dry-run execution, but it does not explain the remaining fields such as proxy, paused, or notification_muted.

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 states a specific bulk verb and resource: importing line-separated URLs as watches. It implies a bulk-import distinction from the sibling create_watch, but does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling.

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 usage for importing multiple line-separated URLs, and states that omitting confirm performs a dry-run. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this instead of changedetection_create_watch or what prerequisites exist.

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