itsm_list_open_incidents

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

No annotations provided; description does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation with no side effects. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but could be improved by noting it does not modify state.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, front-loaded with the action and key details. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could mention what fields are returned or any limitations, but for a simple list tool it provides sufficient context. Minor gap: no mention of response format.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. Description adds meaningful context about the return (open incidents sorted by severity), exceeding the baseline.

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?

Description clearly states the action (list), target resource (currently open incidents), and sort order (by severity). It distinguishes from sibling tools like itsm_list_tickets which would list all tickets.

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?

Description implies use when needing open incidents sorted by severity, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with alternative list tools like itsm_list_tickets.

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