alert_noise_and_flap_analysis

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly signals '[READ][analysis]', indicating a read-only, non-mutating operation. It also states the output is a 'recommendation', implying no direct changes. This is more transparent than typical mutation tools, though it lacks detail on potential side effects or permissions.

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: a single header line plus an args list. It is front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds value. No fluff or redundant content.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, read-only nature, parameter semantics, and basic output type. It does not explicitly define 'flap' (present in the tool name) or describe the exact return format, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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. 'noise_threshold' is defined as an instance count threshold for noise, and 'target' is specified as a Prometheus target name from config with a clear 'omit for the default' instruction. This adds deep meaning beyond the bare schema.

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: 'Find noisy/duplicate alerts → dedup/rollup recommendation.' This is a specific verb+resource+outcome that distinguishes it from sibling tools like alertmanager_alerts (list alerts) and firing_alert_rca (root cause analysis).

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: for analyzing noisy/duplicate alerts and getting dedup/rollup recommendations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, relying on the context provided by the purpose.

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