Retrieve a single alert trigger by its ID to inspect its configuration and details. Use it when you need to look up one specific trigger in Maintenant monitoring.
Get a single alert trigger by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Trigger ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.10.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond the name — nothing about behavior on a missing/invalid ID, permissions, or what a "trigger" contains — so with annotations carrying the load this is an adequate 3.
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 nine-word sentence with zero padding that front-loads the verb, the resource, and the constraint on cardinality. Nothing further could be trimmed without losing information.
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?
The tool is trivial (one required, fully documented param) and annotations cover its read-only nature, so little is needed. However, with no output schema the description gives no hint of what a trigger record contains or what happens if the ID is unknown, leaving minor gaps for an agent deciding how to handle the result.
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?
Only one parameter, and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage ("Trigger ID"). The description's phrase "by ID" restates the schema rather than adding format, sourcing, or lookup semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 gives a specific verb (Get) and resource (a single alert trigger) plus the lookup key (ID), which cleanly separates it from list_triggers and from unrelated get_* siblings on other resources. It does not explicitly name the nearest alternative (list_triggers), so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.
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?
"Get a single ... by ID" implies the usage condition (you already have an ID and want one record rather than a list), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of list_triggers as the alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.