list_alert_conditions

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 correctly implies a read-only operation without side effects, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or ordering. For a list operation, this is acceptable but minimal.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key features. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundancy or wasted space.

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 the simple nature of the tool (list with optional filters) and no output schema, the description covers the essential functionality. It could mention that it returns a list of conditions, but the current description is still fairly complete.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The tool description merely summarizes the filters (policy, name, NRQL query) without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool lists alert conditions with optional filters by policy, name, or NRQL query. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('alert conditions'), and distinguishes from sibling tools that create, delete, or update conditions.

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?

Explicitly mentions optional filters, giving context on when to use (e.g., when you need to find conditions by policy or name). However, it does not provide exclusions or alternatives, which would be helpful but are not strictly required for a simple list tool.

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