seerr_create_settings_notifications_gotify_test

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'this modifies your Seerr instance,' but this is vague and doesn't disclose key behavioral traits like whether a test notification is sent, whether settings are written, or what side effects occur. It provides only minimal extra context beyond the annotations.

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 one short sentence and front-loads the action and resource. It has no fluff, though the capitalized 'WRITE' is stylistically odd and slightly confusing.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description remains sparse. It fails to explain what the test operation does, prerequisites (e.g., existing Gotify settings), or what the response indicates, leaving significant gaps for a side-effectful test tool.

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?

The schema has one undocumented 'body' object parameter with 0% description coverage and additionalProperties=true. The description provides no parameter semantics, leaving the agent with no guidance on what data to send or whether the body should be empty.

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 tests Gotify settings, with verb 'Test' and resource 'Gotify settings'. It distinguishes from sibling list/create tools by naming this a test, though it doesn't specify what the test entails.

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?

'Test Gotify settings' implies the use case of validating Gotify configuration, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the list or create Gotify settings siblings. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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