thruk_top_noisy_hosts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions the time window parameter but lacks details on what constitutes an alert (hard/soft), sorting order, or performance implications. The behavior is somewhat transparent but incomplete.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not describe the return format, filtering options, or grouping behavior. The schema covers some details, but the tool description lacks completeness.

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 83%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add per-parameter meaning beyond the schema; it only provides the overall purpose. The schema itself has good parameter descriptions.

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 returns the top N hosts ranked by HOST ALERT count over a time window. It uses specific verbs and resources ('Return', 'top N hosts') and distinguishes from siblings like thruk_top_noisy_services by focusing on hosts.

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 implies usage for retrieving top hosts by alert count but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like thruk_list_alerts or thruk_alert_heatmap. No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided.

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