boond_alerts_get

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 merely restates the operation implied by the tool name and gives no information about not-found behavior, errors, response shape, or whether the operation is read-only beyond the word 'Get'.

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 five words long, front-loaded, and free of redundant text. It is efficient for a simple retrieval operation, though it stops just short of including helpful context such as what is returned.

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 one-parameter get operation, the description is minimally usable: an agent knows to pass an alert ID. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves gaps around response contents and failure behavior, which a slightly fuller description could easily address.

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 only defines id as a required string with minLength 1 and no description. The phrase 'by ID' reinforces that the parameter is the alert identifier, which adds a little meaning, but it does not specify the ID format, source, or any additional constraints.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('an alert') and includes 'by ID', which distinguishes it from search-style siblings without explicitly naming them. It is clear and unambiguous about the operation's goal.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of boond_alerts_search or boond_alerts_update, and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit cue is that the caller has an alert ID, but that is not stated as a usage rule.

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