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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description effectively discloses it's read-only, free, and never marks messages as read, adding value beyond the annotation. It also mentions that disabled groups are omitted, which is behavioral context not captured in annotations. Slight deduction for not describing the output structure in detail, but not critical.

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 concise, front-loading the core purpose and usage, and every sentence adds value—covering default behavior, parameters, read-only nature, and exclusions. No waste or redundancy.

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 two-parameter tool with no required parameters and an existing schema, the description provides all necessary information: default behavior, pagination usage, read-only guarantee, and exclusions. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema fully documents both cursor and category parameters. The description adds context by explaining how cursor and category work together for pagination, which is marginally helpful. Given the high coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 reads account messages across support, billing, and account notices, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying its unique functionality of retrieving notifications, which is not indicated by any sibling tool name.

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?

It explicitly explains when to use it: with no arguments for recent items, and with category and cursor for pagination. It also states exclusions: security alerts are not available and disabled groups won't show, providing clear context and alternatives for such cases.

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