notch_done

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the visual outcome (flash green, auto-hide) and the semantic context (resolve current task). While it doesn't detail side effects or edge cases, the disclosed behavior is sufficient 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 two tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Resolve the current task: flash green, then auto-hide') followed by a concise usage note. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema and a fully described schema, the description provides the necessary context: what the tool does, when to use it, and what the user sees. It doesn't elaborate on interactions with siblings or edge cases, but given the low complexity, this is sufficient.

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 input schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, each with clear meanings (completion label, optional detail, dismissal delay). The tool description adds no extra parameter-level semantics, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Resolve' and identifies the resource 'current task,' with clear behavior 'flash green, then auto-hide.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like notch_error and notch_status by explicitly targeting 'complete' updates at the end of long work.

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 explicitly states when to use: 'Use for "complete" updates at the end of long work,' giving clear context. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is specific enough given the sibling tool names.

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