Create an alert rule

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive, and the description simply repeats the fact that a rule is created. It adds no behavioral context such as whether repeated calls create duplicate rules, whether validation occurs, or what side effects firing channels may have.

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?

Although the description is short, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. For an 8-parameter creation tool, a single sentence that merely restates the tool's name does not earn its place as useful guidance.

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 8 parameters, a required triggerType enum, conditional threshold requirements, and no output schema, yet the description provides none of the needed context. An agent cannot correctly determine how to construct a valid alert rule from this description plus the sparse 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 description coverage is only 38%, leaving most parameters (name, enabled, cooldownMinutes, thresholdDurationSeconds, triggerType semantics) undocumented. The description does nothing to compensate: it mentions no parameters, no required fields, and no relationships between triggerType and thresholdValue.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 no guidance on when to create an alert rule, what prerequisites exist, or which sibling tool should be used instead (e.g., update_alert_rule for modifying an existing rule). There is no context to help an agent choose this tool over alternatives.

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