Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

vmware-aria

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_alert_notes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve notes attached to an alert to see who is handling it and what actions were taken. Page through user and system entries with timestamps and user names.

Instructions

[READ] List the notes on one alert — who is handling it and what was done. Each row: id, note text, type (USER or SYSTEM), user_name, user_id, created_time_ms.

Use add_alert_note to record a new one. An unknown alert id is an error (HTTP 404), not an empty list.

Returns a paginated envelope: items, returned, limit, total (null when the API reports no size), truncated, hint, next_offset, and notes_note — null when the answer was read; otherwise items is UNKNOWN, not empty, and must not be reported as "no notes".

Page it: limit is the page size (1-500; 0, negatives and anything above 500 are rejected, not clamped), offset is how many rows to skip, and next_offset is the offset of the next page — pass it back as offset and stop when it is null. Do not loop on truncated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoPage size, 1-500 (default 100). Out-of-range is rejected.
offsetNoNotes to skip; pass the previous response's next_offset.
targetNoAria target name from config; default when omitted.
alert_idYesThe alert UUID from list_alerts (not the resource UUID).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.15.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this read-only, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: 404 on unknown alert id rather than empty list, the exact paginated envelope, the unusual notes_note/UNKNOWN edge case, and explicit pagination instructions. This is exactly the context an agent needs beyond the hints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense rather than padded, front-loads purpose and output shape, and then covers pagination and error cases. Some phrasing is slightly convoluted, but each sentence carries essential operational detail for a tool with no output schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a paginated list tool with no output schema and several non-obvious edge cases, this description is complete: row format, pagination loop mechanics, error behavior, and the critical 'do not report UNKNOWN as no notes' rule are all covered. An agent can invoke and interpret results correctly without additional documentation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description need not restate parameter basics. It adds real value by explaining limit rejection semantics, offset usage via next_offset, and alert_id 404 behavior. The target parameter is not elaborated, but the schema already defines its default and meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific operation ('List the notes on one alert') and clearly defines the resource and row contents. It stands apart from sibling tools like get_alert or list_alerts by naming the record type and the related write tool, add_alert_note.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: notes for one alert, with a specific alert_id, and explicitly directs recording new notes to add_alert_note. It does not enumerate when to choose this over other list/read siblings, but the single-alert scoping and sibling pointer provide adequate guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools