task_clear_alarms

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: it removes all alarms, returns the updated task, and notes the lack of automatic sync. This is sufficient for inferring safety and side effects. A minor gap is not specifying behavior when no alarms exist, but the clarity is still high.

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 four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: action description, post-condition, alternative tool, sync warning, and example. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, effect, return value, sync behavior, and an example. It also links to the complementary tool, providing complete context for effective use.

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 schema already covers the parameter with 100% description coverage. The description adds an example usage call, reinforcing that `id` is required and providing context. This adds value beyond the schema, justifying a score above the baseline of 3.

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 starts with a specific verb 'Remove' and resource 'alarms/notifications', clearly stating the tool's action. It also distinguishes from sibling `task_set_alarms` by directing users to that tool for adding alarms, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool (to clear alarms) and points to `task_set_alarms` as the alternative for installing new alarms. It also warns that mutations don't sync automatically and advises calling `sync_trigger` for cross-device visibility, providing comprehensive usage guidance.

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