Alerts Create Alert

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

The description usefully surfaces that destructive actions are gated behind confirm=True, which is context beyond the bare confirm:boolean parameter. However, it doesn't resolve the tension with destructiveHint=false (the destructiveness comes from action_sql, not the tool) and says nothing about the alert's initial state after creation or required privileges. Annotations already carry the read/write and idempotency profile, so this is a modest add.

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?

Two compact sentences with zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the safety note. Brevity is appropriate for the size, though it comes at the cost of the missing semantics rather than through efficient compression.

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?

Placeholder.

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 coverage is only 44%, so the description must compensate, and it doesn't. It names schedule/condition_sql/action_sql but never explains that condition_sql is the evaluated query and action_sql the payload that runs, nor what comment, database, schema_name, or warehouse_name mean in context. 'Destructive actions require confirm=True' gives partial meaning to one of the nine parameters.

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 ('Create an alert') plus the three defining components (schedule, condition SQL, action SQL), which clearly separates it from siblings like alerts_describe_alert, alerts_list_alerts, and alerts_drop_alert. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to create vs. use an existing alert, no prerequisites (warehouse running, schema/database context, role privileges), and no mention of what state the new alert lands in. The only procedural note is the confirm=True gate for destructive actions.

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