list_alerts

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: alerts belong to a signed-in account rather than an API key, this MCP can only read/report them, and a non-signed-in key yields setup guidance rather than data. It also discloses allowance tiers, which helps the agent interpret non-data responses. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=true.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the structure is logical: what it does, account constraints, fallback behavior, then the argument. It is slightly verbose with background about how alerts fire and the allowance list, but those details are relevant enough that the length is largely justified.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, and it covers the key behavioral edge cases: feed reachability, account-session requirements, read-only scope, and fallback guidance. For a one-parameter read tool, nothing important is missing.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It does: 'limit' is documented as the maximum fired alerts to show, with the condition 'if the alerts feed is reachable' and the default value, fully covering the single optional parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Show ALT/FNDATA price alerts') and explicitly scopes it as read-only or explanatory. It distinguishes this MCP's read/report capability from the app's create/manage capability, so an agent can tell exactly what this tool does without opening the schema.

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?

Explains when this tool applies (reading/reporting alerts), when it does not (creating/managing alerts, which must be done in the app), and what happens when the API key is not tied to a signed-in session. The alternative path (app.altfndata.com) is named explicitly.

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