plurk_get_alerts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds useful context with 'recent' (temporal scope) and 'normalized' (data format), but omits critical behavioral details such as the time window for 'recent', pagination behavior, sorting order, or rate limit implications of the OAuth credentials.

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 sentence that places the action and resource at the front. However, the phrase 'for the credentials supplied in this call' is slightly redundant (credentials are inherent to the call) and could be replaced with more useful parameter or behavioral documentation.

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 the complex nested credentials object (4 required fields), the limit parameter with constraints (1-100, default 20), lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to prepare the agent for the OAuth credential structure, pagination limits, or the structure of normalized alert events.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, requiring the description to compensate. While it acknowledges the 'credentials' parameter ('for the credentials supplied in this call'), it fails to document the four required nested OAuth fields (appKey, appSecret, etc.) or explain their semantics. It completely omits the 'limit' parameter, leaving both top-level parameters effectively undocumented.

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 provides a clear verb ('Return') and resource ('recent normalized alert events'), establishing what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly differentiate 'alerts' from sibling tools like 'mentions' or 'threads' (plurk_get_mentions_context, plurk_get_thread_context), which could help an agent select the correct endpoint.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like plurk_get_mentions_context or plurk_get_me. There is no mention of prerequisites, required user states, or conditions that would indicate when alerts are the appropriate resource to fetch.

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