notch_error

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses visual behavior (flash red, longer duration than success) and implies auto-dismissal, but it does not state potential side effects like clearing existing notifications or how it interacts with other statuses.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and outcome. It contains no redundant words and effectively conveys the tool's essence.

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 notification tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate but not rich. It covers purpose and key visual behavior, but lacks explicit usage guidance, default value explanations (though schema has them), or edge-case handling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it does not mention text, detail, or dismissAfter.

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's function: to resolve the current task as failed, with specific visual behavior (flash red, linger longer than success). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like notch_done (likely success) and notch_clear.

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 phrase 'Resolve the current task as failed' implies usage for error/failure scenarios, and the contrast with 'success' hints at alternatives, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative tool.

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