ListSqlAlarmRules

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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds no behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate that this is a read-only list operation, nor any side effects, permissions, or response characteristics. The name hints 'List', but the description itself discloses nothing.

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 very short (one sentence) but under-specified. It front-loads the name and domain but provides no real content, so it is not effective conciseness—rather, it lacks substance that would earn its place.

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 list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least state that it lists SQL alarm rules and possibly the region/project context. It does neither, leaving the tool's purpose and behavior mostly undefined.

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 fully describes both parameters (region and project_id) with clear override semantics, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but per the baseline rule, a score of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the load.

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 restates the tool name as 'operation ListSqlAlarmRules' without specifying any verb or resource. It offers only the context 'Huawei Cloud LTS', but fails to say it lists SQL alarm rules, making it nearly tautological and indistinguishable from sibling tools like ListKeywordsAlarmRules.

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 on when to use this tool or how it differs from alternatives. No context is given for typical use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without any basis to prefer it over related tools.

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