list_alertmanager_configs

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source. The verb 'List' inherently conveys read-only behavior, but the description adds no extra behavioral details (e.g., pagination, permissions, scope boundaries). It is accurate but minimally disclosive.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the operation without extraneous words. It is appropriately concise for a simple list tool.

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 is low complexity with an output schema, but the description leaves the 'cluster_alias' parameter unexplained and does not describe the namespace default behavior. Overall, it is sufficient for a basic list but incomplete in parameter context.

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%. The description only implies the 'namespace' parameter via 'in a namespace,' but does not explain the 'cluster_alias' parameter, which remains ambiguous. Since two optional params exist, the description should compensate but does not.

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 explicitly states the action ('List') and resource type ('AlertmanagerConfig resources'), scoped to a namespace. This clearly differentiates it from sibling list tools for other resource types (e.g., list_prometheus_rules, list_service_monitors).

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?

Usage is implied by the resource name—one would use this to list AlertmanagerConfig objects—but the description does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of cluster_alias context.

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