get-alert

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The word 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention potential errors, authorization requirements, or response characteristics. It is minimal but not misleading, so it earns a moderate score.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It contains no fluff and is front-loaded with the key information.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description adequately covers the core functionality. The schema documents the parameters, and the description clearly identifies the operation. It is sufficiently complete for this low-complexity tool, though it could mention the 'fields' parameter behavior or typical response format.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (alert_id and fields). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'alert' and explicitly states 'single' and 'by its ID', clearly distinguishing it from the sibling get-alerts (list) tool. It precisely conveys the scope and lookup mechanism.

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 implies that this tool is for fetching one alert given an ID, which is clear context for a simple get-by-ID operation. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives like get-alerts or provide any exclusions, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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