List Sumo Logic Monitors (native alerting; read-only)

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description discloses authentication requirements (access key with 'View Monitors' capability, HTTP 403 without), query behavior (name-only substring matching), and status filtering mechanics (no OR support, multiple statuses trigger separate API calls unioned client-side).

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then efficiently packs details including a footgun warning and cross-reference. Every sentence provides value without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description explains return fields (name, folder path, type, status, triggers, notifications). It covers authentication, query limitations, and status filtering behavior. Complete and self-contained for a read-only list tool.

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 100%, but the description adds substantial value: for 'query' it explains matching behavior and syntax, for 'status' it details the lack of OR support and client-side union, and for 'limit' it complements the schema. This goes well beyond the baseline for high coverage.

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 it discovers native Sumo Logic Monitors with specific fields (name, folder path, type, status, triggers, notifications). It explicitly identifies itself as a read-only management API call, distinguishing it from sibling tools like sumo_list_alerts.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: fired-alert history is handled by sumo_list_alerts. Includes a 'FOOTGUN' warning about query matching limitations (name-only, case-insensitive substring) and explains the query syntax including monitorStatus.

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