open_notification_panel

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

The core behavior—pulling down the notification/quick-settings panel from the top of the screen—is stated, which is useful because no annotations are provided. However, side effects, toggle behavior, and any device/UI-state requirements are not disclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter UI action, even though it lacks parameter and usage detail.

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 one-parameter action with an output schema, the description covers the main action but omits serial-parameter context and any guidance on when the action can be performed. It is minimally viable rather than fully 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?

The single 'serial' parameter is not mentioned in the description, and the schema provides only the parameter name and a null default with no description. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should have compensated for this gap but did not.

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 identifies the action ('lehuzasa' = pulling down) and the resource ('ertesitesi/gyorsbeallitasok panel' = notifications/quick-settings panel). It is specific enough to distinguish the tool from list_notifications or generic swipe, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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 states only what the tool does, not when to use it versus alternatives such as list_notifications or a manual swipe. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions such as screen state or whether the device must be unlocked.

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