atlas-list-alerts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context that alerts are triggered (not configurations) and defaults to OPEN, beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. Every sentence adds value: purpose, distinction, default behavior. Front-loaded with clear purpose.

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 output schema exists, description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, distinction from configurations, and default behavior comprehensively for a 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description reinforces the status parameter's default behavior but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists triggered alerts for a MongoDB Atlas project, distinguishing from alert configurations. The verb 'List' and resource 'triggered alerts' are specific. Among sibling tools, no other alert listing tool exists, so no confusion.

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 provides guidance on using the status parameter to see different types of alerts (default OPEN, others via TRACKING or CLOSED). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but this is sufficient given no direct sibling for alerts.

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