list_alert_policies

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

In the absence of annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool lists policies and shows muted services, custom thresholds, and reasons, but does not explicitly mention it is a read-only operation or any required permissions. The verb 'list' implies non-modifying behavior, but a clear declaration would improve transparency.

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 very concise: one action sentence, one detail sentence, and three example queries. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and has no unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains what is listed (custom alert policies) and what details are shown (muted services, custom thresholds, reasons). However, it could mention the return format or any limits, but given the simplicity, it is adequate.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter info. Per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description adds no misleading or missing parameter information.

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 'List all custom alert policies for anomaly detection' with a specific verb and resource, and the examples further clarify the scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_alert_policy (create/update) and delete_alert_policy (delete) by focusing solely on listing.

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 description provides clear context through examples of when to use (e.g., 'What alert policies do I have?'), but it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use or comparison with siblings like create_anomaly_tickets or check_notification_config, which could be related.

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