cleanuparr_create_notification_provider

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint: true, and the description does not add behavioral details beyond that. The mention of common fields and API DTO is more about input structure than behavior, but the annotation covers the safety profile, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence provides useful information. No filler or repetition.

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?

Given the sparse schema and no param coverage, the description gives helpful guidance on types and field structure. It could be more explicit about required fields or exact DTO shapes, but the output schema exists and the description covers the essential invocation context, so it is fairly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential meaning by enumerating valid provider_type values and explaining that the provider object contains common fields (name, isEnabled, event flags) plus provider-specific fields per the API DTO. This significantly compensates for the sparse schema.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('notification provider'), listing supported types. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update, test, and delete notification providers.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does and which provider types are supported, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or mention exclusions. However, the create/update/test/delete sibling structure makes the intended usage obvious.

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