Raise an ITOC360 alert

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

The description discloses that calling pages the on-call via the escalation policy (SMS, voice, push, email) and explains the idempotency mechanism (updates existing alert on fingerprint reuse). This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations, which only state idempotentHint without explaining the behavior.

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, each carrying distinct value: purpose with paging, idempotency behavior, and a usage guardrail. Front-loaded with the core purpose and no wasted words.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects: paging, idempotency, and caution about when to raise. It doesn't explain return values or error conditions, but those are not explicitly required given the annotations and schema. Overall, it provides enough for an agent to call it 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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics; the fingerprint reuse behavior is already captured in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool raises an alert in ITOC360 and explains its paging effect. It distinguishes from the sibling resolve_alert by the action (raise vs. resolve), even though the sibling is not explicitly named.

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 provides clear context for when to call: 'Only raise alerts for real problems that a human needs to act on' and explains that reusing a fingerprint is safe for ongoing problems. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use resolve_alert instead, relying on the sibling name for differentiation.

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