pushover_list_sounds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description's help. The description adds only the mild implication that the full, unpaginated set of sounds is returned ("all available"). It says nothing about authentication, rate limits, or the shape of the returned sound list.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotation gaps, the description still leaves the sole required input completely unexplained and does not indicate what a returned sound looks like (name/slug) or that those values are directly usable downstream. Adequate for guessing the purpose, insufficient for confident 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?

The single parameter `app_token` has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it, so nothing explains what an app token is, where to obtain it, or how it differs from a user key — a real ambiguity in Pushover's auth model. The description provides no compensating parameter meaning at all.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("List all available notification sounds in Pushover"), which is unambiguous and distinguishes it from the other Pushover siblings (send_notification, get_receipt, validate_user, cancel_emergency). It doesn't explicitly name a sibling or state the scope limitation, but the purpose is clear from the text alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention that this is a reference-data lookup whose results feed the `sound` parameter of pushover_send_notification, and no prerequisites. An agent must infer the use case purely from the tool name.

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