Get Alert Triggers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, confirming safety and openness. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the API key requirement and the fact that trigger history uses per-alert counters (trigger_count/last_triggered_at) rather than an event feed. This goes beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 at three sentences. The first sentence defines purpose, the second provides usage guidance, and the third explains API behavior. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the return values (alert IDs, trigger count, last triggered time) and API key requirement. It is complete enough for an agent to use, though mentioning any pagination or limit might be slightly better.

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% for the single optional parameter 'since', which is already well-documented in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning or usage details for this parameter, so the baseline score 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 'Get recent trigger activity for the user's price alerts' with specifics on what information is returned (which alerts fired, count, last triggered). It differentiates from sibling tools like opa_list_price_alerts by focusing on trigger history rather than listing all 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?

Explicitly states 'Use when the user asks whether any alerts have gone off or about recent alert activity.' This provides clear context, though it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly name alternatives, which would elevate it to a 5.

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