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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint/non-idempotent annotations by disclosing the cascade: paid refresh crawls stop if this alert started tracking and no other active alert needs it, while self-started track_profile tracking is untouched. The not_found-on-already-ended error is also spelled out, backing the non-idempotent hint. It does not say whether the alert record itself is recoverable, but the side-effect surface is otherwise well covered.

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?

Front-loaded and readable, but 'Free' appears at the start and 'Cost: free' repeats at the end, so one sentence is wasted. The cascade sentence is long but carries real information.

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 destructive single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers cost, the cascade consequence, the blast radius boundary, and the failure mode. Only the success response shape and reversibility are unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100% and the single alertId parameter is fully documented in the schema with the same source-tool note, so the description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 and resource ('Ends a viral alert by alertId') and names the sibling tools that produce the id (list_viral_alerts, create_viral_alert), so an agent can place it precisely among the viral-alert tools.

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 provenance of alertId is given, which implies when to call it, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus untrack_profile or other cleanup paths, and no preconditions (e.g. what happens if the alert is the last one).

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