alert_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description reinforces these with 'Read-only — this skill never creates/edits/deletes alerts.' It adds meaningful behavioral context about the pagination envelope, total/truncated semantics, and where to go next, which annotations do not cover.

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 compact and well-structured: a clear read header, a concise return-shape summary, routing guidance, pagination semantics, and a safety note. Every sentence earns its place without 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?

For a list tool with rich annotations and fully documented parameters, the description covers the return envelope, pagination behavior, sibling routing, and read-only guarantee. Nothing needed to select or invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how limit and name_filter interact with total and truncated, e.g., 'raise limit or narrow name_filter when true,' which is not fully captured by the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: '[READ] List defined Log Insight alerts.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly saying 'Start here, then pass an id to alert_get or alert_history,' making the tool's role in the family 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?

It gives explicit guidance: use this as the entry point, then route to alert_get or alert_history with an id. It also instructs when to raise limit or narrow name_filter based on the truncated flag, which is actionable usage guidance beyond the schema.

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