list_alarm_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds a useful hint: max 2000 results returned, and outlines return structure (name, type, threshold, controlled period).

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?

Concise, front-loaded with emoji and purpose. Uses bullet points for parameters and return hints. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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 simple tool with 2 optional params, annotations present, and no output schema, the description provides essential info: purpose, filters, return content, and limit. Could mention pagination or sorting, but max 2000 hint helps. Adequate for selection.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. Description adds minimal value: restates the enum mapping for alarmType (same as schema) and keyword as 'rule name keyword'. No new semantic depth beyond 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?

Description clearly states '获取告警规则列表' (get alarm rules list) with specific filtering options by type or name. It distinguishes from siblings like list_alarms (events) and mutation tools for rules.

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?

Describes optional filters for alarmType and keyword, giving guidance on how to use. Does not explicitly compare to siblings, but the tool's purpose is distinct enough. Context is clear for listing rules.

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