getRecommendations

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

No annotations provided. The description does not explicitly state read-only behavior, and the phrase 'Exposes Approve/Reject actions' is ambiguous (could suggest this tool performs those actions). No mention of permissions, side effects, or what happens when no incidentId is given.

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, front-loaded with key data (prioritized, high/medium/low). No fluff, every part adds value.

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?

Adequate for a simple read tool with one optional parameter. Describes output (prioritized recommendations) and optional scoping. However, lacks details on return format/behaviors (e.g., what happens with no incidentId, pagination) and could clarify relationship to approve/reject actions.

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% with a good description for incidentId. The description repeats 'Optionally scoped to one incident' but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The mention of 'high/medium/low' is about output, not parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states 'Get prioritized AI recommendations' with priority levels, and optional scoping to an incident. The verb 'Get' and resource 'AI recommendations' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like 'approveRecommendation' which are action-oriented.

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?

Implies usage for viewing before taking actions by mentioning 'Exposes Approve/Reject actions' and optional scoping. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context with siblings provides clear differentiation.

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