Retrieve all active alerts across every device, with pagination controls to review alerts page by page.
Get all active alerts across all devices
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageNo | No | Page number for pagination | |
| pageSize | No | Number of alerts per page |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 'active' filter, which is real behavioral information, but says nothing about pagination limits, default page size, total counts, or retry/rate-limit behavior for what could be a very large fleet-wide result set.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope constraint ('across all devices') is stated immediately. It is arguably under-specified rather than padded, which is the better failure mode for conciseness.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only source of behavioral context, and it omits result shape, pagination semantics, and result volume expectations for a potentially unbounded fleet-wide query. Adequate to identify the tool, not adequate to invoke it safely at scale.
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 both pagination parameters, so the schema already does the explanatory work. The description adds no guidance on defaults, maximum page size, or whether omitting the params returns everything, so baseline 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?
Specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('all active alerts') plus scope ('across all devices'), which implicitly separates it from the sibling get_device_alerts. It does not explicitly name the sibling, but an agent can tell this is the fleet-wide listing versus the per-device variant.
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 phrase 'across all devices' implies the usage context (use this for org-wide triage, get_device_alerts for one device), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not statement, and no mention of whether results should normally be paginated through.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.