list_alerts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the default exclusion of Closed alerts and the severe-first ordering, which an agent would otherwise not know. Return format and paging behavior remain undocumented.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler, with the resource identity and default scope front-loaded before the ordering note.

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 10-parameter read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, this is largely sufficient. The remaining gap is that nothing indicates result shape, paging beyond 'limit', or how the encoded 'query' interacts with the typed filters.

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% and every parameter carries its own description, including the state default and severity enumeration. The description adds no per-parameter meaning beyond restating the Closed exclusion already present in the state field, so baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('Event Management alerts (em_alert)'), plus the default behavior. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_alert_summary or list_active_events, so it stops short of the top score.

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?

Usage is implied by 'operational filters' and the non-Closed default, which tells an agent this is the general browsing tool. However, no alternative is named (get_alert by sys_id, list_active_events for live events), so the agent must infer routing.

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