send_notification

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the tool's core behavior (sending a desktop notification) and mentions customization options (icon, sound, click-to-open). However, it does not address permission requirements, failure behavior, or whether notifications are disruptive, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, then scenarios, then features. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers purpose, scenarios, and feature highlights, while the schema handles parameter constraints. Given no output schema, it is adequately complete for a simple notification tool, though it could mention potential permission prerequisites.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description merely echoes the schema's custom icon/sound/open features without adding new semantic details about the parameters.

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 opens with 'Send system desktop notification' (发送系统桌面通知), a specific verb+resource pair, and lists concrete use cases (task completion reminders, status updates, important events), making the tool's purpose unmistakable even without sibling context.

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?

It explicitly states applicable scenarios ('可用于任务完成提醒...'), providing clear when-to-use guidance. No alternatives are named because there are no sibling tools, but the context is sufficient.

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