Get Alert Logs

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read. The description adds useful context that returned logs are status-change history with transition reasons, but says nothing about ordering, pagination semantics, or response shape beyond that. With annotations covering safety, this is a modest but real addition.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by short usage bullets and a code example, with no redundant prose. The emoji section header and the 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN USERS' scaffolding are mild padding but do not bury the key line.

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 simple 3-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, the definition covers purpose, triggering conditions, and an invocation example. Only the returned log fields/ordering are left unexplained, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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 coverage is 100%, with limit, nextId, and alertId all documented in the schema itself. The description only restates alertId and shows the ID format via the example (alertId=3Yr); it adds no meaning beyond the structured fields, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieve logs for a specific alert by ID from Mackerel. This is clearly distinct from list_alerts (enumeration) and get_alert (the alert object itself), though the description never explicitly contrasts with them.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use bullets (view status change history, investigate alert transitions and reasons) plus a concrete call example. Missing any exclusion or pointer to the sibling get_alert for the alert's current state, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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