Attach Alert

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, openWorld=true, idempotent=false, destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them: 'from provided data' hints at a payload but does not say whether the association is additive, whether duplicates are rejected, or whether re-attaching is safe despite idempotent=false.

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 with no wasted words. Its brevity is efficient, though it contributes to the under-specification scored elsewhere.

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?

This is a mutating tool with a nested request envelope and an output schema, yet the description does not explain the data wrapper structure, the expected alert state, or error conditions. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the input-side and behavioral gaps remain substantial.

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 only 50%: incident_id is documented in the schema, and alert_ids has a brief schema description, but the nested 'type'/'attributes' envelope and the meaning of passing null alert_ids are unexplained. 'From provided data' adds no meaning beyond what the schema already shows.

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 verb and resource ('Attach alerts to an incident'), which is enough to distinguish it from pure read siblings like list_incident_alerts, but the trailing phrase 'from provided data' is vague filler that does not clarify the operation. It does not name the closest sibling or explain how it differs from creating/updating alert events.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool, what prerequisites exist (e.g., that the alerts must already exist), or what alternatives to prefer. The agent must infer everything from the name and schema.

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