grafana_obter_regra_alerta

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does signal a read-only retrieval and names the returned content (expressions, labels). It does not state behavior on an unknown UID, permission requirements, or whether all rule fields are included, which leaves real gaps for an unannotated tool.

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 front-loaded sentence that names the resource and the payload contents with no filler. The leading '52.' numbering artifact is minor noise but slightly hurts readability.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema (so return shape needn't be described), the definition is minimally sufficient. It omits how to acquire the UID and any failure behavior, which an agent would need to chain this after the listing 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 description coverage is 0% with one required parameter, so the description should compensate but does not. It never explains what 'uid_regra' is or where to obtain it, only implying that a specific rule must be identified.

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 ('Consultar') and resource ('detalhes completos, expressões e labels de uma regra de alerta específica'), so an agent knows this is a single-rule retrieval, distinct from the listing tool. Sibling differentiation is only implicit via 'específica' rather than by naming grafana_listar_regras_alerta.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus grafana_listar_regras_alerta or grafana_atualizar_regra_alerta, nor where the required uid comes from. The only hint of context is the word 'específica', which the agent must interpret on its own.

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