show_message

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the output is a transient toast, but does not disclose duration, whether it queues or replaces an existing message, or what happens if no TV is reachable.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words; the noun phrase 'short notification (toast)' efficiently conveys both the effect and its transient nature.

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 two-parameter tool with a full output schema and clear annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. Only minor gaps remain (display duration, behavior on delivery failure), which are unlikely to block correct invocation.

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%, including the fallback semantics of the optional 'tv' parameter ('Omit to use the default TV') and the 1-200 character bounds on 'text'. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Show) and resource (short notification/toast on the TV screen), which is distinct from siblings like launch_app, play_youtube, or set_screen. It is clear what the tool does, though it never names or contrasts against any sibling tool.

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 'short notification (toast)' implies transient, user-facing messaging use, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or routing to an alternative (e.g., set_screen) for persistent text.

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