appwrite_send_push

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden but only reveals the provider requirement. It critically fails to explain the targeting hierarchy (topics vs users vs targets), delivery semantics, scheduled_at behavior, or draft mode functionality.

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 appropriately brief at two sentences with front-loaded action, though the '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds noise without semantic value. It avoids unnecessary verbosity while delivering the core concept.

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 high complexity of push notification targeting (15 parameters with intricate relationships between topics/users/targets) and complete absence of schema descriptions, the minimal two-sentence description is severely inadequate for correct invocation.

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 0% description coverage for 15 parameters, and the description compensates with absolutely no parameter guidance. Critical parameters like 'site' (Appwrite site ID?), 'message_id' (format requirements?), and the mutually exclusive targeting options are completely undocumented.

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 sends push notifications and specifies the underlying providers (FCM/APNs), distinguishing it from sibling communication tools like appwrite_send_email. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to choose this over appwrite_send_sms.

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?

It mentions the hard prerequisite of requiring a configured push provider, but provides no guidance on when to use push notifications versus sibling alternatives (email/SMS) or what happens if the provider is misconfigured.

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