Prometheus: List Alerts

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

Adds real behavior beyond readOnlyHint: default ordering (firing first, most severe first), the fields returned (labels, summary, description, counts by state and severity), and the crucial caveat that silences and inhibitions are not applied. Missing only finer points like pagination/truncation behavior when limit caps results.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and in what order, then interpretation caveats. No repetition of the tool name or filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the return shape, ordering, counts and the key interpretive trap, which is everything an agent needs to call this correctly and not misreport an alert as paging.

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% — limit, state, search and severity are all documented with defaults, bounds and an example. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the schema does the work and 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?

States a specific verb and resource (list alerts Prometheus is firing or holding pending) and immediately scopes it away from the neighboring rule/target tools by describing what the alerts carry. The `Watchdog` and Alertmanager remarks further separate it from generic query siblings.

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?

Gives clear context on what the result means (Prometheus's own view, silences/inhibitions not applied, an alert here may not have paged anyone) and how to read the Watchdog heartbeat. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative tool for the Alertmanager view or when to prefer this over prometheus_query, so it is strong but not a full when/when-not map.

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