Pending alerts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly states 'reads stored data only', disclosing read-only behavior, and the dependency on watch_refresh. It also describes the output logic (change %), though it doesn't mention edge cases like empty responses or exact return format. Still, it provides key behavioral context that an agent needs.

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, tightly packed sentence that front-loads the core question, then specifies criteria and dependency. Every phrase adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what it does, how it selects data, and its dependency on watch_refresh. An agent can call it correctly without ambiguity; the only minor omission is specifying the exact return structure (e.g., list vs. boolean), but the criteria are so precise that this is unlikely to cause issues.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't add parameter-specific info (none exist), but that's expected. The empty schema is fully described, and the description adds meaning about the data transformation performed, which is appropriate.

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 clear purpose: 'Answer whether anything you watch got cheaper' and defines the exact criteria (at/below target_price or down 5%+). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly referencing watch_refresh as a prerequisite, making its role as a query tool unambiguous.

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?

It provides an explicit instruction to run watch_refresh first, establishing when to use this tool (after refreshing data). It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when NOT to use it, but the prerequisite and 'reads stored data only' hint at its passive role, which is sufficient contextual guidance.

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