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

The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing that the tool returns identical success responses regardless of whether the notification exists, belongs to another user, or was actually deleted. This anti-probing behavior is not captured in the annotations, which only mark destructive and idempotent hints. The description fully reveals the tool's surprising response semantics.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and permanence, followed by the crucial behavioral caveat. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 simple single-parameter tool with a clear output schema, the description covers purpose, permanence, and the identical-response behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing, and the output schema handles return-value details.

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% and the schema description already states nearly all relevant semantics: 'Deleting is permanent. Succeeds silently if the id does not exist or is not yours.' The description adds no new information beyond the schema, so it stays at the baseline for high 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 states a clear action ('Delete one of your notifications') with a specific resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from related batch operations like colony_delete_notifications_batch by explicitly targeting a single notification and clarifying ownership ('your notifications').

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 implies when to use this tool—for deleting a single notification—but does not explicitly compare it to alternatives such as colony_delete_notifications_batch or colony_delete_read_notifications. It provides context about the silent success behavior but lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance, leaving some inference to the agent.

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