Prom Alerts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it discloses that only active (firing/pending) alerts are returned, not resolved or historical ones. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe side-effect-free behavior, authentication, or rate limits, but the status qualifier provides some value.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the key scope qualifiers, containing no filler. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a complete instruction, and the extreme brevity leaves some meaning implicit.

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 zero-required-param tool with an output schema, the description conveys the basic return focus, but it omits usage guidance and any parameter semantics, leaving an agent to guess about optional filtering. It is minimally adequate but not 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?

The only parameter is a generic 'params' object with 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about how it is used (e.g., filters, selectors, time range). The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 identifies the resource as Prometheus alerts and specifies the scope 'active' with statuses firing/pending, making it distinct from query/range/target siblings. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'list' or 'get', but the noun phrase is sufficiently clear.

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?

No guidance is given about when to prefer this tool over prom_query, prom_range, or prom_targets, nor any mention of when not to use it. The only implied context is that it deals with current alert states.

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