check_saved_alerts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. However, it only states a high-level action without explaining potential side effects (e.g., does it modify alert state?), permission requirements, rate limits, or whether matches are returned inline or as separate notifications.

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 extremely concise at six words, front-loading action and result. It earns a high score for brevity, but slightly loses because the brevity sacrifices necessary detail for a tool with undocumented parameters.

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 one undocumented optional parameter and no behavioral annotations. Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description fails to clarify the input behavior or output structure. It is insufficiently complete for safe invocation.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the single 'ids' parameter. It adds no meaning beyond the schema's type definition, leaving the agent to guess whether null runs all alerts or a subset.

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's action ('run saved alerts') and outcome ('report new matches'), using specific verbs and a resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_saved_alerts' and 'save_job_alert' by implying execution rather than listing or saving.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and sibling names.

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