lan_pending_dismiss

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the action and the effect of hiding, but does not disclose reversibility, permissions, side effects, or whether 'dismiss' causes deletion or just visibility change.

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. Every word adds value, and it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter action.

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 tool's behavioral and input semantics are underspecified. The agent cannot determine how to obtain a valid pending_id or what the consequences of dismissal are beyond the minimal statement.

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 0% and the description does not mention pending_id at all. The agent is left to infer from the name alone, which is insufficient for a parameter that likely requires specific ID format or provenance.

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 uses a specific verb 'dismiss' and resource 'pending device', and clarifies the effect with 'hide from pending list'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like lan_discover_pending (listing) and lan_device_register.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parenthetical 'hide from pending list' implies a use case but does not explicitly state context, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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