get_alerts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies the account-level scope and the kind of information returned (thresholds, delivery channels, triggered state), but it does not mention permissions, pagination, rate limits, or other operational behavior. This is adequate for a simple read-only listing but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every element ('alert definitions', 'state', and the parenthetical examples) contributes useful information without repetition.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives enough detail about what will be returned (thresholds, delivery channels, triggered status) to set expectations. It does not explain return formatting or pagination, but no output schema exists and the listing scope is clear, so it is nearly complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and nothing in the description creates confusion or contradicts the empty 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('alert definitions and state for the account'), making it immediately clear what the tool retrieves. It is easily distinguished from siblings like list_sensors, get_sensor, get_freezer_status, and get_readings_history because none of those deal with alerts.

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 usage is implied by 'List the alert definitions and state for the account', but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. For a zero-parameter listing tool the context is fairly obvious, yet no explicit guidance or exclusions are provided.

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