Pause notifications for 0–1440 minutes; set 0 to resume immediately. Use it to silence alerts temporarily while keeping the same policy as the dashboard.
Snooze notifications for 0–1440 minutes. Zero resumes; same policy as dashboard.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| minutes | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world. The description adds real behavioral value by defining the duration bound and that zero resumes notifications, but it omits scope (which notifications are snoozed) and whether repeated calls overwrite the existing snooze timer.
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 short sentences with zero filler, and the operative constraint (the range) is front-loaded before the edge-case clarification.
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 one-parameter, non-idempotent-looking-but-idempotent mutation with no output schema, the definition covers duration and the zero edge case, but leaves the blast radius (which notifications, per-source or global) unspecified — the main thing an agent needs to call it safely.
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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter; it does so by giving the domain 0–1440 and explaining the boundary meaning of 0 (resume). It does not state units explicitly or what happens at 1440, but the compensation is substantial for a single integer param.
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+resource ('Snooze notifications') and adds the allowed duration range, which is genuinely informative. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'dismiss_notification', but the verb choice makes the distinction inferable.
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?
No statement of when to use snooze versus dismiss_notification, nor whether the snooze applies to all notifications or only a subset. 'Same policy as dashboard' points at external, unspecified behavior rather than giving the agent actionable guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.