list_silences

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds the 'active' qualifier and describes the return as 'formatted list with details', but omits authentication, rate limits, or error conditions. Basic behavior is conveyed.

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 concise with a front-loaded main sentence, followed by an Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameter, and return value. With an output schema existing, the return is already defined. It is adequate for a simple list tool, though edge cases are not mentioned.

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, but the description explains the only parameter 'cluster' with purpose and an example value ('teddy-prod'), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's default.

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 lists all active silences, with an optional cluster filter. The verb 'list' and resource 'active silences' are specific, and the tool is distinguished from siblings like 'list_suppressed_alerts' by name and scope.

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 explains the optional cluster filter but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_silence' or 'check_karma'. Usage is implied but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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