pin_notification_context

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that pinned contexts are highlighted, which is useful but not a major behavioral disclosure. It correctly states idempotent behavior, consistent with annotations.

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?

Two efficiently front-loaded sentences, zero wasted words. Immediately states action, resource, effect, and key behavioral note (idempotency).

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?

With output schema present (not shown), description is relieved from explaining return values. It covers core behavior (pin/unpin, highlighting, idempotency). Minor gaps: no mention of error handling if contextId is invalid, but overall sufficient for a simple toggle operation.

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 100% with both parameters (contextId, pinned) well-described. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as data types or constraints, but it's adequate given the schema's thoroughness.

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 pins or unpins a notification context, with explicit verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on the notification context resource and mentioning highlighting in inbox, which is unique among pin tools like pin_activity_message.

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 implicitly suggests usage for toggling pin state on notifications, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like archive_notification or pin_activity_message. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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