Send a Blipr alert

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it sends push notifications and defines priority scale (1-5, default 3). However, it does not detail rate limits, authentication, or side effects beyond the basic action. This is adequate for a simple notification tool.

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 extremely concise—two sentences. The first states the core action, the second provides usage context and priority info. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers usage scenarios and priority, but with 6 parameters and no output schema, it could be more complete. Schema descriptions handle parameter details, so this is acceptable. However, the return value or success behavior is not mentioned, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining priority range and default, but does not elaborate on tags, click, title, or topic beyond what the schema provides. Minimal additional insight.

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 via Blipr and provides specific use cases (e.g., long task finished, build broke) that distinguish it from siblings like 'send_critical' or 'ask'.

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 gives concrete examples of when to use (long task finished, build broke, need approval, blocked) and mentions priority default. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the examples are effective.

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