Get AppDynamics alerting configuration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it is a composite read performing parallel fetches via the Alerting REST v1 API. This gives the agent awareness of multiple API calls. It does not cover permissions or rate limits, but read-only nature is implied.

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 two sentences: the first explains what the tool does, the second explains its use case. Every word contributes value, and the information is front-loaded. No unnecessary elaboration.

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 an output schema exists, return values do not need description. The description covers the composite nature, API used, and purpose. It lacks detail on potential heavy load or error handling, but overall is complete for an inventory read tool.

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 already provides a description for the 'application' parameter (name or numeric id). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond stating it operates on one application. With 0% schema_description_coverage (per context), the description should compensate, but it still meets the baseline.

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 it is a composite read that fetches health rules, policies, actions, and schedules for one application. It distinguishes from siblings like appd_list_health_rules which only fetch health rules, making the purpose specific and non-overlapping.

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 ends with 'Use this for "what alerts and to whom" inventories,' providing a clear context for its use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the sibling tools imply those.

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