get_alert

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and description adds value by detailing the specific alert attributes returned (severity, threshold, escalation, etc.), though it could explicitly state no side effects (e.g., no state changes).

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?

Well-structured with sections: purpose, returns, when to use, workflow, related tools. Front-loaded with key details, no redundant sentences, and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly explains return content (alert message, severity, threshold, history, etc.) and places the tool in a clear workflow with related tools, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds a concrete example for the 'fields' parameter ('id,displayName,hostStatus'), aiding understanding beyond the schema's generic description.

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?

Description clearly states the tool gets detailed info about a specific alert by ID, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_alerts (for finding IDs) and acknowledge_alert (for actions after investigation).

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?

Explicitly states when to use: after list_alerts to investigate, check thresholds, review history, and before acknowledging. Provides workflow order and links to related tools (acknowledge_alert, add_alert_note, generate_alert_link).

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