Display a native Herdr notification to alert users, with a custom title, optional body, sound, and screen position.
Show a native Herdr notification.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | No | Notification body. | |
| sound | No | Notification sound. | |
| title | Yes | Notification title. | |
| position | No | Screen position. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already convey the safety profile (non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, closed-world), so the description's only remaining job is to add context such as whether the call blocks, how long the notification persists, or whether it degrades outside a GUI session. It adds none of that.
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?
A single short sentence with zero padding and the key noun front-loaded. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than discipline.
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 4-parameter notification call with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the essentials are covered. However, for a side-effecting display action with no annotations explaining runtime behavior, a sentence on blocking/async semantics or platform requirements would meaningfully close the gap.
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 100%, with both enums (sound, position) and their allowed values fully specified in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, defaults, or interaction detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 gives a specific verb ("Show") and resource ("native Herdr notification"), so the agent knows exactly what action is performed. There are no sibling notification tools to confuse it with, but it does nothing to contrast itself with the rest of the herdr_* family beyond the distinctive "notification" noun.
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 alternatives, and no mention of prerequisites or context. The agent must infer that this is for surfacing user-facing alerts rather than logging or messaging.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.