list_clone_watchers

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits: it lists active watchers, returns specific fields, and resets on app restart. Since no annotations are provided, this information is crucial for safe usage.

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 sentence that efficiently covers functionality, return format, and a behavioral note. Every part earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple list tool with no parameters, the description is fairly complete, specifying return fields and reset behavior. It could mention that it lists all watchers without filtering, but it's 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 input schema has no parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is fine, and the baseline of 3 is elevated because the output format is clearly described.

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 the tool lists currently-active folder watchers, specifies the source (watch_folder_for_recordings), and clearly distinguishes from siblings like watch_folder_for_recordings which creates watchers.

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 but not explicitly stated; it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling tool watch_folder_for_recordings provides context but no direct comparison.

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