service_monitors_incidents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'paginated list' but omits details on ordering, filtering semantics, mutation effects, or data boundaries (e.g., date range).

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 very short and front-loaded, but its brevity sacrifices essential information. While concise, it omits necessary context, making it less effective than a more informative description of similar length.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not specify the source of incidents, filter syntax, pagination defaults, or expected return format, leaving the agent without sufficient information to use the tool 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 input schema has 0% description coverage for its three parameters (page, pageSize, filters). The description does not explain any parameter beyond implying pagination, leaving the meaning of 'filters' entirely unspecified.

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 states the verb 'Get' and resource 'incidents', indicating a list retrieval with pagination. However, it does not specify which incidents (e.g., from service monitors) nor clarify the scope, making it ambiguous among sibling tools like service_monitors_incident_detail and service_monitors_list.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like service_monitors_incident_detail or service_monitors_list are not mentioned, and the description lacks context for selecting this tool over others.

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