List maintenance windows in effect now

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the return is a plain array rather than a page, and it is empty when nothing is silenced. It does not mention sort order or item shape, but that is a minor gap given the annotation coverage.

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, zero waste, and the most decision-relevant information (what it lists, and the sibling to use otherwise) is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the burden of describing returns — and it does, stating the array-vs-page shape and the empty result semantics. Combined with the scope explanation and the sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter syntax for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies; the description correctly signals the absence of filters by noting the call is unscoped.

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 ('list the enabled maintenance windows in effect at this moment') plus the scope model (ORG covers every monitor, MONITOR covers its monitor_ids). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling list_maintenance_windows, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('to tell whether a monitor's alerts are silenced now') and an explicit when-not / alternative: 'For every window, including future and disabled ones, use list_maintenance_windows.' Nothing is left to inference.

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