close_all_notifications

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

The annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, local mutation. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that only currently visible notifications are dismissed, implying history is unaffected and that the action applies to all visible items.

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?

It is a single sentence with no wasted words, and the scope ('all currently visible') is front-loaded in the description. The action and breadth are immediately clear.

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 zero-parameter action with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is complete enough to call the tool correctly. It could mention post-action state or output behavior, but those gaps are minor given the tool's low complexity.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema carries no parameter semantics for the description to supplement. Following the zero-parameter baseline, a 4 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Dismiss', with a clear resource, 'notifications', and adds scope via 'all currently visible'. This makes the action distinguishable from related tools like send_notification or list_notification_history, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 phrase 'currently visible notifications' implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus notification history, DND, or pause controls. Usage is inferable but not stated with alternatives or exclusions.

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