zeph_prompt

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it blocks until response or timeout, requires an environment variable, and sends a push notification. This complements the readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true annotations well.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds essential information.

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?

While the description covers the blocking mechanism and environment requirement, it omits what happens on a response (likely returns the chosen action ID) and does not mention the fallback parameter's behavior. For a tool with no output schema, more context on return values would be beneficial.

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 does not add parameter-specific information beyond what is in the schema, though it frames actions as 'predefined options'.

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 asks the user to choose from predefined options via push notification. It specifies the blocking behavior and timeout, which distinguishes it from siblings like zeph_ask or zeph_input.

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 implies usage when a user needs to select from predefined options, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The blocking behavior and env variable requirement are mentioned but no alternatives are suggested.

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