get_active_alerts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosure. It clarifies that only currently active, non-dismissed alerts are returned, which adds meaningful behavioral context. However, it does not describe any other traits like ordering, pagination, or return format, making it only minimally adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the essence of the tool without extraneous 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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, this one-sentence description sufficiently communicates purpose and scope. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools, though it omits minor behavioral details like ordering or return format; still, overall it is complete for its simplicity.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is complete by default. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4 since there is nothing for the description to explain. The phrase 'active (non-dismissed)' does not affect parameter understanding.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and a clear resource 'currently active (non-dismissed) alerts'. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_dismissed_alerts' by clarifying the selection criteria with 'non-dismissed'.

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 when to use this tool (to view active alerts) and clearly contrasts with 'get_dismissed_alerts', but does not explicitly mention alternatives or state exclusions. The context is clear enough for an agent.

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