list_silences

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the [READ] prefix is redundant but confirmatory. The description does add value by enumerating the silence states returned (active, pending, expired) and noting the default-target fallback, but says nothing about pagination, filtering, or result size.

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-loads the [READ] marker and the resource/states in one line, then the single argument. The simple 'Args:' block is slightly raw formatting but wastes little space.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers the resource, the returned states, and the argument semantics adequately. Only filtering/pagination behavior is left unstated, which is minor here.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does: it explains that 'target' is a Prometheus target name from config referring to its Alertmanager, and that omitting it uses the default. This meaningfully exceeds what the bare string schema 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (Alertmanager silences) and enumerates the statuses returned (active, pending, expired). An agent can identify it clearly, though it never names its sibling alternatives (create_silence, expire_silence) to sharpen the distinction.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternatives. It does not say when to reach for this versus create_silence or expire_silence, nor when a silence listing is relevant, leaving usage to inference.

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