Get notifications

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 lists content types but does not mention pagination behavior, whether notifications are marked as read, or response format. 'Get' implies read-only, which is useful, but the lack of detail on side effects is a gap.

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 concise sentence that explicitly lists the notification types and scope. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place without 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 simple list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely adequate. It defines the content scope but omits details like ordering or whether the list is filtered, and there is no mention of the cursor parameter, which is a minor gap.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'limit' or 'cursor' parameters. The schema provides defaults/ranges for limit but cursor remains ambiguous, and the description offers no pagination context.

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 retrieves notifications for the authenticated account, listing specific types (likes, reposts, replies, follows, mentions). This distinguishes it from siblings like bluesky_get_timeline or bluesky_get_author_feed, which have different scopes.

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 implies usage for the user's own notifications, which contrasts with other feed/profile tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, though the 'authenticated account' scope provides clear context.

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