test_notifier

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the key side effect (an actual alert message is dispatched) and a read-only-style health check, but says nothing about required channel configuration, permissions, or whether the test message reaches a real external destination.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Minor redundancy between 'verify connectivity' and 'health check', which describe nearly the same activity.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the single optional parameter is fully schema-documented. For a simple one-parameter diagnostic tool the description is nearly sufficient, missing only explicit guidance on when to run it and whether the test alert is externally visible.

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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents 'channel' and its 'telegram' default. The description adds nothing about valid channels or how the default is chosen, 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?

States specific verbs and resource: 'Verify notifier connectivity, health check, and dispatch a test alert message.' An agent can tell this is a diagnostic/test tool rather than the production notifier, though it never names the sibling notify_new_jobs it should be contrasted with.

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?

Usage is only implied by the words 'test' and 'health check' – an agent can infer this is a pre-flight/diagnostic call, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative (e.g. 'run this before enabling notifications').

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