datto_edr_alerts_list

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: newest-first ordering, the live-vs-archive distinction, and the 30-day archive threshold. It does not discuss pagination behavior, rate limits, or response shape.

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 three dense sentences with no filler, and the core purpose and endpoint are front-loaded. Every sentence contributes operational detail about filtering, field lookup, or archive access.

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 9-parameter, fully optional list tool with complete schema descriptions and read-only annotations, the description covers the non-obvious points an agent needs: ordering, date filtering, generic "where" filtering, model lookup, and archive handling. Return values and pagination are either obvious or covered by the schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema by explaining that "where" can filter on any property, pointing to datto_edr_api_models for field names, and clarifying when to set archive_table.

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 specific verb and resource: "List Datto EDR alerts," along with the underlying endpoint and default ordering. The list semantics clearly separate it from siblings such as datto_edr_alerts_get and datto_edr_alerts_count, even though those tools are not named.

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?

It explains how to use the main filters: date range, archived state, and arbitrary properties through "where." It also gives a clear condition for archive_table: alerts older than 30 days. It does not explicitly say when to choose this over alerts_get, alerts_count, or raw_request, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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