Control the alert queue

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and destructiveness (destructiveHint=true). Description adds that 'clear-cooldowns' affects command cooldowns, but lacks details on what 'clear' entails (e.g., irreversible removal of pending alerts).

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Could be improved with structured list (e.g., bullet points) but efficient for such a simple tool.

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?

Adequate for a one-parameter tool with no output schema, but lacks details on consequences of destructive actions (e.g., clear removes pending queue) and preconditions (e.g., permission requirements).

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 has 100% coverage with enum and description. Tool description merely repeats the enum values without adding deeper semantics like expected outcomes or side effects per action.

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?

Description explicitly states the tool controls Lumia's alert/effect queue, listing specific actions (pause, resume, clear, clear-cooldowns). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like control_fuze or control_overlay by focusing on queue 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?

No guidance on when to use each action or when to choose this tool over alternatives. Siblings include other queue-control tools, so explicit context would help AI agent select correctly.

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