gx3_alarm_map

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions the xref DB dependency. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the xref DB is missing, or how results are returned, leaving important behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core content (alarm/fault inventory and its attributes) and then quickly states the dependency, making every word earn its place.

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?

The tool has three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description only covers inventory content and the xref DB dependency. It omits usage context, mode behavior, and output expectations, leaving significant gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description adds meaning by specifying that the xref DB is required, which supplements the root parameter's 'Extracted project folder' schema description. It does not explain the mode parameter's list/show behavior or elaborate on the device parameter beyond the schema, but the schema already covers most parameters.

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 identifies the tool as an alarm/fault inventory and lists specific attributes (trigger, hold type, timer setpoint, reset condition), which helps distinguish it from sibling mapping tools. However, it lacks an explicit action verb such as 'list' or 'show', so it is clear but not fully precise about the operation.

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 gives a prerequisite ('Requires the xref DB') but does not explain when to use this tool over alternatives like gx3_device_map or gx3_network_map. No use-case scenarios, exclusions, or alternative references are provided.

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