flipper_notify

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the tool performs actions but is not destructive. The descriptions adds 'Get the device's attention' and lists physical effects (vibrate, flash, beep), which goes beyond annotations by clarifying that it causes tangible outputs.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with key information: purpose and relation to siblings. Every word adds value, no fluff.

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 notification tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and how it relates to siblings. It could mention that it returns no meaningful output, but that is implied. Context is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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 80%, and the description does not add meaning beyond what the input schema provides (e.g., color, frequency, brightness are described in the schema). The description mentions vibration, LED, and beep, but that is essentially the same as the kind enum values. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get the device's attention: vibrate, flash an LED, or beep.' It identifies specific actions (vibrate, flash LED, beep) and distinguishes itself as a shortcut over sibling tools flipper_led, flipper_vibro, and flipper_buzzer, making purpose unambiguous.

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 description explicitly says 'A shortcut over flipper_led / flipper_vibro / flipper_buzzer,' implying it should be used for combined notifications, while sibling tools offer finer-grained control. However, it does not provide explicit when-not conditions, but the context is clear enough.

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