acknowledgeAlarm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose what acknowledging does (e.g., changes alarm status, requires specific permissions, side effects), making it poorly transparent.

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 brief and includes a category header and parameter list. It avoids verbosity but could be more concise by omitting the repeated tool name. Still, it is efficiently structured.

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 no output schema and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the acknowledge operation's effect, return value, or when to use it over siblings. Critical behavioral context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds minor context by marking entity as required (via *) and explaining type for single/multiple selection, but this largely repeats schema info.

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 name 'acknowledgeAlarm' and description indicate the tool acknowledges an alarm, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'clearAlarm' or 'deleteAlarm' by the action of acknowledging, though it does not clarify the exact effect on alarm state.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'clearAlarm' or 'unAcknowledgeAlarm'. No context on prerequisites or typical scenarios provided.

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