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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it stops appearing on all surfaces and acts on the user's behalf. No contradictions. Lacks disclosure of potential side effects beyond dismissal, but the annotation covers the safety profile adequately.

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?

Three sentences front-loaded with the main action, followed by precise usage conditions and parameter requirement. Every sentence is essential and no redundant information.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter source, idempotency, and effect. No missing information that would hinder correct invocation.

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 a clear description of the 'key' parameter: 'The nudge key from the `me` payload's nudge block (required)'. The description merely restates this as 'Required: key (string, the `nudge.key` from `me`)', adding no new semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Dismiss a nudge served in the `me` payload' with a specific verb (dismiss) and resource (nudge from me payload). It distinguishes from ignoring nudges, and no sibling tool targets nudges, so differentiation is inherent.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this ONLY when the user has actually declined the suggestion or asked not to be reminded — never on mere silence', providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including rationale about server-side frequency capping.

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