ambari_alerts_savealertsettings

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Save', which implies a write operation but offers no details on side effects, required permissions, error behavior, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is insufficient for an agent to understand behavioral consequences.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and example parameter. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

For a simple save operation, the description adequately explains the input but omits crucial details such as what the tool returns (e.g., success status, updated settings) and any prerequisites like cluster existence. Given the absence of an output schema, this gap reduces completeness.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning by linking 'repeat tolerance' to the 'alertRepeatTolerance' parameter, but does not elaborate on 'clusterName' or provide additional context beyond the schema.

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 (Save), the resource (cluster-level alert settings), and provides a concrete example (repeat tolerance). This distinguishes it from sibling alert tools that deal with definitions, groups, or notifications.

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 does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions. The only hint is 'cluster-level', which is weak guidance.

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