notification_show

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

No annotations provided, but description fully discloses that hints.verifyDelivery is always included with unverifiable status, explains caveats about Focus Assist and DND, and mentions underlying technology (System.Windows.Forms).

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?

Contains Japanese text and technical references (e.g., 'matrix §3.1 line 158 規範整合') that may hinder clarity for an English-speaking AI; while informative, it could be more concise and better structured.

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?

Comprehensive for a notification tool with no output schema: explains return behavior, limitations, and usage context, leaving no critical gaps.

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 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds context for the optional 'include' parameter but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond schema for required 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 states 'Show a Windows system tray balloon notification to alert the user' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools by being the only notification tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use at the end of a long-running task' and advises indirect observation via wait_until(focus_changes) for post-notification behavior, providing clear when-to-use and alternatives.

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