opa_get_alert_triggers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the API tracks per-alert counters rather than a separate event feed, and returns only alerts that have triggered. This provides valuable behavioral context beyond a simple read operation. No contradictions exist.

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 concise: two sentences plus a note, all front-loaded. Every sentence provides essential information (purpose, usage, behavioral note) without redundancy or fluff.

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 single-parameter tool without output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (trigger counts and last triggered), when to use it, a prerequisite, and a note on data structure. No gaps remain.

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 100% for the single parameter 'since,' which is well-described in the schema. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves recent trigger activity for price alerts, specifying what is returned (which alerts fired, counts, last triggered). This is distinct from sibling tools like opa_list_price_alerts, which list alerts without trigger status.

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 explicitly says 'Use when the user asks whether any alerts have gone off or about recent alert activity,' providing clear context. It also notes the API key requirement, implying prerequisites. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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