zdx_list_historical_alerts

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only', which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds useful context about `since` (unit, default, max) not present in the schema. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination behavior (offset) or return format, but the annotations already cover the safety profile, so this is sufficient.

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 exceptionally concise—three sentences that convey purpose, comparison, and critical parameter detail without redundancy. Every sentence adds value and the structure front-loads the core purpose.

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 has 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description leaves most parameters unexplained. It covers `since` but ignores `limit`, `offset`, and filtering fields (geo_id, location_id, department_id) which are likely important for querying. The description is incomplete for a tool of this complexity, especially with low schema coverage.

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?

With only 14% schema description coverage, the description needs to compensate for the missing parameter descriptions. It does explain `since` (hours, default, max), but the other six parameters (limit, query, geo_id, offset, location_id, department_id) are not described beyond their schema titles, offering minimal semantics. The description's contribution is limited to `since`, which is insufficient for the schema's low coverage.

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 historical (ended) ZDX alerts' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling tool by saying 'Like zdx_list_alerts but for alert rules that have an Ended On date', making its unique purpose 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 a clear comparison to zdx_list_alerts, indicating when to use this tool versus that one. It also notes the `since` parameter semantics (hours, default, max) to guide usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools beyond the comparison.

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