alerts_create_alert

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral constraints: rate limit, required role ('App Service Account'), required licenses, and field-naming conventions. It does not mention response format or error behavior, but provides substantial operational context.

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 well-structured with clear sections, but opens with a redundant title repetition ('Create a Custom Alert' then 'Create a custom alert'). Overall it is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with most sentences providing necessary detail.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, but the description covers mandatory fields, optional fields, naming conventions, rate limits, roles, and licenses. It lacks response format and error-handling details, which are significant for an API call, but given the complexity, the description is quite thorough.

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 must compensate. It does this excellently by explaining mandatory fields, naming conversion rules (lower camel case, hyphen-to-underscore), and listing recommended fields with concrete examples (e.g., 'Container ID' -> 'container_id'). This adds significant 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 function: 'Create a Custom Alert' with mandatory fields. It is specific about the resource and action, but doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like alerts_insert_cef_alerts or alerts_insert_parsed_alerts.

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 usage context including mandatory fields, recommended fields, rate limit ('up to 600 alerts per minute'), and required role/license. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus other alert-insertion sibling tools.

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