get_alert

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context: accepts partial name (case-insensitive) and warns against misuse, but doesn't contradict annotations.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with core purpose, then acceptance criteria, then exclusions. Every sentence is essential.

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 no output schema and low complexity, the description is complete. It specifies inputs (ID or name), explains how they work (partial/case-insensitive), and clarifies scope (specific alert only, not list).

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds that the 'name' parameter is a 'partial name match (case-insensitive)' and explains it is used 'when ID is unknown', providing context beyond the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'view the details of a specific cost alert'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly saying not to use for listing all alerts (list_alerts) or for anomalies (get_anomalies).

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 when-to-use ('when the user wants to view the details of a specific cost alert') and when-not-to-use ('Do NOT use this for listing all alerts... or anomalies'). It also references specific sibling tools as alternatives.

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