notify_dev_tool_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as side effects, delivery guarantees, or required permissions. The agent learns nothing beyond the basic purpose.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with purpose. No extraneous words. However, it may be too minimal for a tool with moderate complexity and siblings.

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?

Given the tool has only 2 required parameters, an enum, no nested objects, and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps in usage context and behavior. It is minimally complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantics for the parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., status and message types).

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 '发送开发工具状态通知' clearly indicates the tool sends notifications about development tool status. It is specific about the resource ('dev tool status') and action ('send notification'), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like notify_error or send_notification, which could overlap.

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 guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus the siblings (e.g., notify_error, notify_ai_work_complete). The description does not mention any context, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent without direction.

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