zdx_list_historical_alerts

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description echoes that. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits, side effects) are disclosed. The JMESPath filtering is a functional feature, not a behavioral side effect. The description adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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 concise—two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and a key capability. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters) and rich schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the primary purpose and unique feature (JMESPath). With an output schema likely detailing return structure, the description does not need to explain values. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what the tool does, though it omits pagination specifics (already in schema).

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% with detailed descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description only highlights the 'query' parameter for JMESPath, which is already documented in the schema. It does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as listing ZDX historical alerts in read-only mode. It specifies the key feature of JMESPath client-side filtering. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from similar tools like zdx_list_alerts or zdx_get_alert, the name 'historical' implies a different scope, and the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as zdx_list_alerts or zdx_get_alert. It neither states prerequisites nor clarifies scenarios where this tool is preferred or when not to use it. The JMESPath filtering mention is a feature, not a usage condition.

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