alarms_describe_alarm

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

No annotations exist; the description implies a read operation ('Get detailed information') but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or idempotent. The description adds minimal context beyond the name.

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 a single sentence that is concise and to the point, with 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?

While an output schema exists (which covers return values), the description lacks guidance on usage context and does not mention any behavioral traits like error conditions or required state (e.g., alarm must exist). It is minimally complete for a simple describe operation.

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%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description does not add any additional semantic detail beyond what is already in the schema.

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 detailed information about a specific alarm', using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific alarm'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'alarms_list_alarms' which lists alarms, and mutation tools like 'alarms_acknowledge_alarm'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'alarms_list_alarms' for listing or other alarm tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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