alerts_update

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the mutation and idempotency profile is covered structurally. The description adds the field shape but omits whether updates are partial or full replacements and what permissions are needed, so it adds only modest behavioral value beyond the annotations.

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 compact sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. The dense brace notation is efficient, though slightly cryptic without further explanation.

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 mutation tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description gives the payload structure but leaves gaps: no mention of partial vs. full replacement behavior, no defaults, and no permission context. Adequate but incomplete.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and does list the nested fields (enabled, seconds, percent, interval_s, notify). However it only names them without explaining their meaning or valid ranges, leaving the semantics of each field unclear.

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 verb (Change) and resources (alert rules and settings), and even sketches the payload shape. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling alert tools like alerts_ack or alerts_clear.

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?

No indication of when to use this tool versus the other alert siblings (alerts, alerts_ack, alerts_clear), nor any prerequisite or scope guidance. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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