show_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does add useful behavior: it auto-dismisses after a duration and persists longer than show_popup. However it never states that the popup is non-blocking, whether the user can dismiss it manually (dismiss_all_popups exists), or how it behaves when called repeatedly.

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?

Three tight sentences, capability first, use cases second, sibling differentiation last. No filler, though the parenthetical construct list is slightly verbose relative to its value.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, content format, use cases, and the key comparison to its closest sibling. Remaining gaps are behavioral details (dismissal, blocking) rather than anything that would prevent a 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 100%, so all six parameters (level, title, screen, source, duration, markdown) are already documented with enum and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond restating that markdown is rendered, so baseline 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?

Specific verb+resource: renders MARKDOWN in a documentation-style popup on the macOS screen, enumerating supported constructs (headings, lists, code blocks, links, quotes). It explicitly contrasts with the sibling show_popup ('stays longer on screen'), so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete use cases ('a summary report, API results, a changelog, key findings') and a relative rule versus show_popup. It stops short of an explicit 'use show_popup instead when...' exclusion or prerequisites, leaving the inverse inference implicit.

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