Retrieve detailed information about a specific alert rule by ID, including conditions, thresholds, and notification actions.
Get details about a specific alert rule
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| rule_id | Yes | Alert rule ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context such as response format, error conditions, or authentication requirementscars. It does not contradict the annotations, so a mid-range score is appropriate.
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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource immediately, making it instantly scannable. Every word contributes meaning.
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 simple single-entity getter with one fully documented parameter and comprehensive readOnly annotations, the description is largely sufficient. Minor gaps include lack of output shape details and a possible need to differentiate from the sibling get_alert_details, but nothing critical is missing.
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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single rule_id parameter, including its own description ('Alert rule ID'). The tool description's 'specific alert rule' only weakly reinforces that rule_id is the identifier, adding no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('alert rule'), and a scope qualifier ('specific'), which unambiguously defines a single-entity fetch. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like get_alert_rules (plural list) and create/update/delete_alert_rule.
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 phrase 'specific alert rule' implies the agent should supply a rule_idaaa and expects a single result, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over alternatives like get_alert_rules or get_alert_details. No exclusions or 'when not to use' is provided, so usage is only inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.