List Incident Severity Levels

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) already indicate read-only idempotent operation. Description adds pagination details but contradicts output by saying incident array instead of severity levels.

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?

Three sentences are concise but contain a critical error (incidents vs severity levels). The error outweighs brevity, making the description misleading.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return structure. It mentions paginated array but misstates content. Lacks detail on filter effects, sort options, and the actual shape of severity level objects.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds minor context about pagination controls and required company_id, but no new semantic insight beyond 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 states it returns a list of Incident Severity Levels, but then says it returns a 'paginated JSON array of Incidents', creating confusion. The verb+resource is present but the output misstatement degrades clarity.

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?

It suggests using to enumerate incidents and control pagination, but the target is severity levels. No alternatives like list_incidents or show_incident_severity_level are mentioned, and the misdirection harms guidance.

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