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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds nothing to that – it does not say whether resolving is permanent, whether it deletes versus archives the notification, or how it differs from acking one, which is exactly the context a destructive tool needs.

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?

One short sentence with the key information front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though efficiency here shades into under-specification rather than true crispness.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, but for a destructive single-notification action sitting next to notifications_ack, the description omits the one thing an agent needs: the effect and the alternative. Not complete enough to call confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the schema only says 'notification_id: string'. The description mentions 'one ... notification' but adds no meaning about where the ID comes from (notifications_list/scan) or its format, leaving the single parameter under-specified.

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?

States a specific verb (resolve) and resource (one TaskTools notification), which is better than tautology. But it gives no basis for distinguishing this from the sibling notifications_ack, which plausibly also 'resolves' a notification – the agent cannot tell them apart from the text alone.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus notifications_ack, notifications_scan, notifications_list, or notifications_summary, and no prerequisites mentioned. The agent must infer selection purely from tool names.

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