push

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does add one useful non-schema fact — a 90-second timeout — but it does not mention side effects on the app/device, delivery guarantees, failure modes, or whether the notification can wake or alter app state.

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 short sentences: the first states the action, the second adds a concrete timeout constraint. There is no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 the output schema covering return values, this is a complex 18-parameter tool with no annotations. A single-line description does not explain how to choose among platform/device/target selectors, what payload forms are acceptable, what prerequisites must hold, or what happens after the push is delivered. The schema helps, but operational context remains largely missing.

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 approximately 89%, so the parameter schema already documents most fields well. The description adds no parameter-level meaning; it does not elaborate on payload shape, device selection, or how the various selectors interact.

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 a specific verb ('Deliver'), a specific resource ('push notification payloads'), and the target context ('an installed app'). This makes it easy to distinguish from siblings like click, type, or install, even without naming an alternative.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions or exclusions. Usage must be inferred entirely from the one-line purpose, which is insufficient for a command with 18 parameters and many sibling tools.

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