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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'swipe away'/'clear all' is consistent with a non-read operation that removes transient UI items, so no contradiction. It adds the useful defaults (newest notification, clear-all scope) but says nothing about what happens when no notifications exist, what is returned, or whether the removal is reversible.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the primary action first and the fallback/clear-all modes packed into one parenthetical. No filler, no 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 three-parameter, no-output-schema tool this covers the essential decision points: which notification, the default, and the bulk mode. Only minor gaps remain (preconditions about the shade being open, behavior on an empty shade), which do not block 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 only 33%, with just 'session' documented ('Session from open_app'), so the description must carry id and all. It does: 'id' selects which notification (defaulting to the newest) and 'all: true' means clear everything, which is meaning not derivable from the bare boolean/string types.

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?

Uses a concrete verb ('Swipe away'/'Clear all') on a specific resource ('a notification in the open shade'), which is easy to tell apart from sibling push_notification and open_notification. It does not explicitly name those siblings, but the action 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 parenthetical '(newest if no id)' and 'or Clear all with all: true' give the agent a clear selection rule between the two modes of use. However, it never states the prerequisite that the shade must already be open (a sibling tool exists for that), nor any alternative when a notification id is unknown.

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