get_monitors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get all monitors with optional filtering.' It does not mention pagination, rate limits, default inclusion of logs, or any side effects. This is a read operation, but the description adds minimal context beyond the name.

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 a single, compact sentence that conveys the core purpose. It has no unnecessary words or repetition, and the information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema), the description is minimal but not misleading. It does not explicitly mention pagination limits or the include flags, though those are covered in the schema. It is adequate for a straightforward list tool but lacks some behavioral context.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are fully documented. The description's phrase 'optional filtering' only generically references the filter parameters without adding specific 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action ('Get') and resource ('monitors'), with 'all' indicating the scope of fetching multiple monitors. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_monitor', which presumably targets a single monitor.

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 implies usage for retrieving a list of monitors, possibly with filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like 'get_monitor'. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred scenarios, so guidance is only implied.

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