list_alertsList the signed-in user's alert subscriptions. Requires a SnowSure user access token (OAuth).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| markdown | No | Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result (may be omitted when structuredContent carries a typed payload; content[0].text always has the prose). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / markdown / descriptionPrevious value: -"Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result."New value: +"Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result (may be omitted when structuredContent carries a typed payload; content[0].text always has the prose)."Output schema / requiredRemoved value: -[
- "markdown"
-]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the authentication requirement (OAuth token), which is additional behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.
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 with two clear clauses, no extraneous text, and front-loads the main action.
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 tool with no parameters, annotations covering safety, and an output schema (present but not shown), the description is complete. It adds the crucial auth requirement, leaving no ambiguity.
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 schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter info, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.
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 clearly states it lists the signed-in user's alert subscriptions. The verb 'list' and resource 'alert subscriptions' are specific, and the sibling tools 'subscribe_alerts' and 'unsubscribe_alerts' are distinct for creation and deletion, so purpose is well-defined.
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 mentions an OAuth token requirement, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage context is implied by the name and siblings, but not articulated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.