notch_styles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that the tool is a read-only listing/check operation with no side effects, and adds the context that it should be called before first use if needed. It could have explicitly stated it makes no changes, but 'List' and 'check' strongly imply safety.

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 sentences, with the purpose front-loaded and usage guidance immediately following. Every word adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 no-parameter listing tool, the description provides complete context: what it lists, why it's useful, and when to call it. The absence of an output schema is fine because the tool's purpose is self-explanatory and the sibling tools provide surrounding context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to elaborate on schema items. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly focuses on what the tool does rather than parameters.

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 'List[s] the available notch readout styles with metadata' and also mentions checking 'current display capability.' It specifies a distinct resource and action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like notch_status or 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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Call this once before your first notch_status if you are unsure which style fits, or to check whether this Mac currently has a notch at all.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke this tool and implies alternatives (e.g., use notch_status after choosing a style).

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