notification_show

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

The annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false) already sketch the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description does add one genuinely useful behavioral fact – that the toast renders inside the Herdr terminal UI rather than as a system notification – but says nothing about duration, stacking, whether an active UI is required, or what happens when the UI is not focused.

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?

A single sentence with no filler and the scoping detail front-loaded. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than unnecessary padding, so it earns a good but not top score.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but for a four-parameter mutation-flavored tool with zero schema descriptions the description should explain the parameters and the transient nature of the toast. It leaves the agent to guess at placement, sound, and display duration.

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 0% across four parameters, including two enums (sound: none/done/request, position: corner values). The description explains none of them, so the agent cannot tell the role of body vs. title, the default placement, or how sound affects behavior.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Show a toast') and scopes it to the Herdr terminal UI, which distinguishes it from OS-level notification tools. It is not a tautology of the name, and no sibling tool covers notifications, so the purpose is legible without opening the schema.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool, when not to, or how it relates to any alternative. An agent must infer entirely from the tool name that this is for surfacing a transient user-facing message.

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