send_push_notification

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

Annotations already declare this as a write operation with destructive potential, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, delivery guarantees, rate limits, or any consequences, and the [Write] marker merely restates the annotation.

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 plus a [Write] marker. It is extremely concise with no wasted words, earning the highest score for structure even though other dimensions suffer from lack of 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?

Given the tool's side effects (destructiveHint true) and the existence of sibling notification tools, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, target requirements (user vs group), or when to choose this over alternatives, leaving substantial gaps for a write operation.

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?

All five parameters have complete descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain them. It adds no extra meaning, which matches the baseline for fully-documented schemas.

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 (send) and resource (push notification to mobile app users), giving a specific purpose. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like create_notification or send_emergency_broadcast, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description neither mentions conditions, prerequisites, nor contrasts with other notification-related tools. This leaves the agent without direction on tool selection.

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