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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: the preview 'sends nothing', is evaluated under the owner's settings (not the caller's), and is bounded to a 24-hour window. These are the details an agent would otherwise have to guess. It stops short of saying what the preview output looks like or whether it reflects scheduled vs. all alert rules.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the definition first and the disambiguation second. The critical reassurance ('sends nothing') is placed immediately after the definition where it matters most.

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 single-parameter read-only preview with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side-effect profile, time window, and the sibling it is not. The only gap is what the agent should expect back — a list of would-be alerts, counts, recipients? — which is left entirely implicit.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema coverage is 100% — the schema already says view_id is a UUID obtained from list_views. The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (shows/preview) and resource (a View's alerts over the last 24 hours) plus the crucial scope qualifier 'under its owner's current settings'. It also explicitly separates itself from list_matches, so an agent can pick correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ('check a View's alerts before or after create_view or update_view') and an explicit alternative for the adjacent need ('For the Matches a View has already recorded... use list_matches'). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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