Desktop Notification

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=false, implying it's a non-read, non-destructive, non-idempotent action. The description adds that it uses notify-send but does not detail side effects (e.g., user interaction needed, persistence). It provides moderate extra context beyond 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?

The description is concise: two short paragraphs plus an example. It front-loads the purpose and usage, with no unnecessary information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 notification tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and example. It lacks details on return behavior or error handling, but these are minor for this tool's simplicity.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by providing an example call and listing args with default values and constraints (urgency enum), making parameter usage clearer.

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 explicitly states 'Show a desktop notification to the user (via notify-send)' and specifies when to use it: 'to announce that a long task finished or that you need attention.' This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools which are mostly data or system operations.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (announcement of completion or need for attention). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient and no obvious alternatives exist among siblings.

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