squadcast_list_escalation_policiesList escalation policies for a team. owner_id (a TEAM id — use squadcast_list_teams to find it) is REQUIRED. Squadcast: GET /v3/escalation-policies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ownerId | Yes | Team id that owns the escalation policies (required) → owner_id. | |
| pageSize | No | Page size → page_size. | |
| pageNumber | No | Page number → page_number. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description mentions a list operation, which is consistent with the annotation 'readOnlyHint: true'. No additional behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, side effects) are provided beyond the annotation, so the description adds minimal value in this dimension.
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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the core purpose and a key usage hint. Every word serves a purpose, with no unnecessary elaboration.
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 list tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, required parameter, and how to obtain it. Lack of output format detail is minor given the tool's straightforward nature and the provided API endpoint suggestion.
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 description adds context about 'owner_id' referencing a team ID. However, it does not elaborate on the meaning of 'pageSize' or 'pageNumber' beyond the schema's own descriptions. The hint to use another tool is helpful but doesn't enhance parameter semantics significantly.
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's purpose: 'List escalation policies for a team.' The verb 'list' and resource 'escalation policies' are specific, and the team context distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on incidents, services, users, etc.
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 explicitly notes that 'owner_id' is required and guides the user to use 'squadcast_list_teams' to find it. It does not explicitly exclude other list tools, but the context of listing escalation policies is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.