snooze_monitor

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

Annotations indicate this is a mutating, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: during the window, alerts are suppressed, and clear=true removes the window. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 concise sentences lead with the primary action, then give the required exclusivity rule and examples. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to parse quickly.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is essentially complete. The main missing piece is return behavior, but that is not required to invoke the tool correctly.

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 each parameter already has a descriptive schema comment. The description reinforces the 'exactly one of' relationship and provides examples for duration, but does not add meaning beyond what the input schema already states.

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 states a specific action ('Set or clear a maintenance window') on a specific resource ('a monitor') and explains the observable effect ('the monitor will not alert'). It is clear even among siblings like pause_monitor and resume_monitor, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from those alternatives.

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 description gives clear operational constraints: 'Provide exactly one of' duration, until, or clear=true. However, it does not explain when to choose snooze_monitor over related sibling tools such as pause_monitor or resume_monitor, leaving the selection context mostly implied.

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