Dismiss a persistent notification

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by stating the unknown/already-dismissed-ID no-op behavior (extending past simple idempotency to the unknown-ID case) and disclosing the underlying HTTP service call. It stops short of describing rate limits or auth needs, so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

Front-loads the action and scope, then structures the rest as 'Use when / Not for / Returns' with zero filler. Every sentence earns its place; the sibling routing is placed right after the core action.

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 single-parameter mutation with an output schema present, the definition covers purpose, scope boundary, the sibling alternative, and error/no-op behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented, so baseline is 3. The description adds only a light cross-reference ('as passed to services_notify_persistent_create') that duplicates the schema's own note, so it doesn't lift the score further.

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 ('Dismiss') and resource ('one persistent notification by its ID'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling services_notify_persistent_dismiss_all. An agent can tell exactly which of the two notification-cleanup tools to pick without opening either schema.

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?

Provides explicit 'Use when: clearing one specific UI banner' and 'Not for: clearing every banner — use services_notify_persistent_dismiss_all', naming the alternative and the selecting condition. This is textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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