alert_list

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description adds substantial behavioral context: it explains the return envelope structure, that total is the real count, and how truncated indicates whether more results exist. It also states the operation is read-only explicitly, reinforcing annotations without contradiction.

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 concise yet dense, with a clear structure: purpose, parameters, return format, workflow, pagination note, and safety disclaimer. Every sentence adds value, and the use of inline code-like formatting for field names improves readability without bloat.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values—it does so with the envelope format and item structure. It also covers pagination semantics, parameter meanings, and the recommended workflow, making it complete for a list tool of this complexity.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: name_filter is a case-insensitive substring, limit is max results (default 50), and target is a target name from config. This provides essential meaning that the schema lacks.

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 'List defined Log Insight alerts' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly saying 'Start here, then pass an id to alert_get or alert_history', positioning itself as the entry point for listing alerts.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: 'Start here' for listing, then use alert_get or alert_history for details. Also gives actionable pagination advice: 'raise limit or narrow name_filter when truncated is true.' This clearly indicates when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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