aruba_explain_sdi_notifications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, which covers safety. The description adds minimal behavioral context ('translate' implies transformation but not mutation). It does not discuss side effects like marking notifications as read if confirm_read is true.

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 short sentence makes it highly concise, but it sacrifices necessary detail. No structure or front-loading beyond the one line.

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?

Despite having an output schema and 3 parameters with no schema descriptions, the description is extremely terse. It fails to explain return value, parameter semantics, or any procedural context needed for 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 0%, and the description provides no clarification for any of the three parameters (direction, invoice_filename, confirm_read). The tool name hints at invoice context, but meaning of parameters is left entirely unspecified.

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 clearly states the tool translates SDI notifications into human-oriented status information, specifying the action (translate) and resource (SDI notifications). It distinguishes from siblings like aruba_get_received_notification_by_filename or aruba_parse_notification_xml which retrieve or parse raw data, but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 this tool versus related tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or when to avoid using it.

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