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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses critical behavior: alerts fire only on newly-ingested records, are rejected if query.any lacks mention terms, batch notifications, and are not metered. It also surfaces the free-account requirement and signup link behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with 'Create an Alert.' Each sentence adds meaningful behavior or constraints; there is no filler or 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 5-parameter nested-object tool with no output schema, the description covers behavior, constraints, firing modes, delivery, metering, and account prerequisite. It does not describe the return value, but the absence of an output schema and rich schema descriptions partially mitigate that gap.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds key semantics not in schema: the requirement that query.any contain at least one mention term and the distinction between per-match and threshold firing. This lifts it to 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?

Description opens with 'Create an Alert' – a clear verb+object. It then states the firing condition ('fires when newly-ingested records match `query`'), distinguishing from sibling alert_update/delete/list operations. The purpose is specific and 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?

The description gives actionable usage constraints: requires at least one mention term in query.any, per-match vs threshold firing, and delivery targets. It also notes account prerequisite. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools (e.g., alert_update), though the create action is self-evident.

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