search_alerts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool searches across alert fields and returns a JSON array. It does not explicitly state it is read-only or mention rate limits, but it covers the core behavior comprehensively.

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 concise, with a summary line followed by structured argument details. Every sentence adds value, avoiding unnecessary words while covering purpose, parameters, and return type.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters and no nested objects, the description fully addresses input and output. It explains the query behavior, parameter details, and return format (JSON array). With an output schema available externally, no further details are needed.

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%, so the description must fully explain parameters. It does so by defining 'query' as a search string, 'limit' with a default, and 'time_range' with examples like '1h'. This adds complete meaning beyond the bare 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 tool searches OSSEC alerts with a free-text query across multiple fields. It specifies the resource ('OSSEC alerts') and the action ('search'), differentiating from siblings like 'get_alerts' which likely have different retrieval methods.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (free-text search). While it does not explicitly exclude other use cases or mention sibling alternatives, the context of searching across fields is distinct enough to guide correct selection.

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