create-alert-insight

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing whether this creates a new record, requires specific permissions, how wait_for_commit affects durability, or what happens on duplicate insights.

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 sentence is brief and front-loaded with the primary action, containing no unnecessary words. However, it is so sparse that it borders on under-specification, sacrificing explanatory value for brevity.

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 moderate complexity (nested object, optional wait_for_commit parameter) and the complete lack of annotations or output schema, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain what an insight is, how it relates to comments or other alert data, or the semantics of the wait_for_commit flag, leaving an agent without enough context to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 67% (alert_id and insight described), but the description adds no parameter semantics. The wait_for_commit parameter is undocumented in both the schema and description, and the description does not clarify the structure or importance of the insight nested object.

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 uses a clear verb+resource pattern ('Add' + 'insight to an alert'), making the core action unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like add-alert-comment, but the resource type (insight vs comment) provides some implicit distinction.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add-alert-comment or get-alert-insights. The description simply states the action without any context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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