sigsci_list_alerts

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It states 'list all alerts,' implying a read-only operation, but provides no details about pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error behavior. The lack of any behavioral disclosure beyond the basic operation leaves the agent uninformed about important constraints.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. However, it could include more useful information without becoming verbose. It earns its place but could be more informative.

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 lack of an output schema and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what an alert is, the format of the returned data, or mention pagination or limitations. The tool is part of a complex domain, and the description fails to provide enough context for an agent to use it correctly without external knowledge.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (corpName, siteName). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already explains what these parameters are. With full schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not enhance understanding of parameters.

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 'List all alerts for a site' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (alerts) with a scope (for a site). However, it does not distinguish itself from many sibling list tools that also operate on a site, such as sigsci_list_events or sigsci_list_site_rules. The purpose is clear but not uniquely positioned among similar tools.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling list tools, but the description does not mention when 'list alerts' is appropriate compared to 'get_alert' or other list tools. No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative suggestions.

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