mute_alerts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds real value on top: it flags the operation as a time-boxed (self-expiring) suppression and points to the inverse operation, which conveys reversibility and scope beyond the annotation flags.

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 with the [WRITE][risk=medium] tag and a one-line purpose, followed by a compact Args block. No sentence is wasted and the most selection-relevant information comes first.

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 write tool with no output schema and no annotation coverage of duration/expiry semantics, the description supplies purpose, risk tag, time-boxing, inverse operation, and per-parameter meaning. It stops short of stating permission requirements or what the call returns, but what is present is sufficient to invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden and does so for all three params: entity_uri is defined as a SWIS URI with a sourcing hint (list_muted/SWQL), minutes as a window length, and target as a config name with 'omit for the default'. It does not restate the schema defaults (minutes=60), a minor omission.

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: 'Time-boxed alert suppression for an entity.' It also names the inverse tool (unmute_alerts), letting an agent place it correctly relative to its one obvious counterpart without opening a schema.

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 'Time-boxed' qualifier and the named inverse imply the intended scenario (temporary suppression that can be reversed), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance, nor reference to list_muted or schedule_maintenance as alternatives for longer suppression.

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