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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description adds the useful cross-tool fact that returned ids feed delete_alert, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether results are scoped/filtered.

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 tight sentence with the core action front-loaded and zero filler. The parenthetical about alert contents is compact and informative rather than redundant.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does explain what alerts contain and that ids are included. It omits result ordering or volume, which is a minor gap for such a simple list tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to document; baseline 4 applies. No parameter syntax or semantics are missing because none exist.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (saved want alerts) and clarifies what an alert consists of (keywords and/or category). It differentiates itself from set_alert/delete_alert by explaining the returned ids, but does not distinguish itself from other list-type siblings such as my_wants or search_wants.

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 only implied: naming delete_alert hints that this is the discovery step before deletion, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement and no mention of set_alert as the creation counterpart. An agent can infer the workflow but must do so itself.

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