alert_acknowledge

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

The description correctly indicates a mutation (acknowledge) consistent with readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. However, it does not add behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as effects on notifications or reversibility.

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 concise sentence of 6 words perfectly conveys the essential purpose without any waste. It is appropriately front-loaded for the tool's simplicity.

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 the simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but misses an opportunity to explain typical effects (e.g., hiding from views). It just meets the minimum viable threshold.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all parameters, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond 'by ID' already implied in the purpose.

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 the action ('Acknowledge'), the resource ('alert in LibreNMS'), and the key identifier ('by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like alert_get_by_id or alert_unmute.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like alert_unmute or alert_rule_edit. The description implies basic usage but lacks exclusions or context for choosing this tool.

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