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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful behavioral details: unresolved-only default and a cap of 100 most recent alerts, which are not visible in the schema or 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 brief and well-structured, using a dash list for alert types and clear sentences. It packs essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only list operation with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, default behavior, limitation, alternative tool, and required context. Nothing essential is missing.

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 input schema fully describes the only parameter (unresolvedOnly, boolean, default true) and the description echoes the default behavior without adding extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies given complete schema coverage.

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 the tool lists governance alerts with concrete examples (quality drops, breaking-change spikes, stale drafts, blocked publishes). It explicitly distinguishes from resolve_governance_alert and implies distinction from list_alert_policies.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to browse alerts; to mark one resolved use resolve_governance_alert', providing direct guidance on when to choose this tool over its named alternative. Also notes the requirement for organization context, which is important for proper invocation.

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