alerts_data

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this a safe read, so the behavioral bar is lower. The description adds real context by stating the scope covers alerts/rules/checker status and excludes cluster queries, though it says nothing about return shape, freshness, or pagination.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the scope exclusion is tacked on efficiently. It is a fragment rather than a full sentence, but nothing is wasted.

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 no-param, no-output-schema read tool this covers the essentials: it says what data is returned and what is out of scope. It stops short of describing the return contents or how the alerts/rules/checker status are structured, which the absent output schema would otherwise require.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema requires no semantic elaboration. Baseline 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to compensate for.

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?

It names the resources (alerts, rules, checker status) and scopes them to the Alerts view, which is more specific than a tautology. However, it lacks a clear verb (fetch/list) and does not distinguish itself from the sibling `alerts` tool, so an agent can't fully disambiguate from the name alone.

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 parenthetical '(no cluster queries)' hints at an exclusion and effectively routes cluster data to `cluster_monitor_data`, which is a small piece of guidance. But there is no explicit when-to-use, no named alternative, and no prerequisites.

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