unmute_alerts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it handles this well by leading with '[WRITE][risk=medium]', explicitly framing the operation as a write with medium risk. It also explains the behavioral effect, 'lift suppression', which tells the agent the operation changes entity alert state rather than just reading it.

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 concise and front-loaded: it opens with the critical write/risk marker, then gives a one-line purpose, followed by a clean parameter list. There is no filler or repetition of schema 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 simple two-parameter action tool with no output schema, the description is complete: purpose, behavior, risk level, parameter semantics, source for the primary argument, and default behavior for the optional argument are all covered. No critical guidance 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: entity_uri is the SWIS entity URI to resume and should come from list_muted, while target is the SolarWinds target name from config and can be omitted for the default. This adds real meaning beyond the bare schema field names.

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 states a clear action, 'Resume alerts', a specific resource, 'alerts for an entity', and the semantic effect, '(lift suppression)'. This distinguishes it from the obvious sibling mute_alerts and makes its purpose unmistakable.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: to resume alerts that were previously suppressed. It also provides practical guidance by specifying that entity_uri comes from list_muted and that target can be omitted for the default. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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