getCustomerNotificationsCount

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, if it requires specific permissions, what filters are applied, or what the returned count represents. The description 'Get count' gives no insight into behavior beyond what the name implies.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than concise efficiency. It lacks essential content such as what is being counted, parameter details, or use context. A good description should be brief but informative; this one provides no value, making it inadequate for guiding tool invocation.

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?

The tool is a count endpoint with three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. A complete description should explain the return value (e.g., integer count), the role of lang and isRead, and the required customerId. The current description is entirely insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior, especially without additional context.

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?

The input schema has partial coverage: lang and isRead have descriptions, but they are incomplete/truncated ('Language in which notification' and 'Filter notifications based on '), and customerId has none. The description adds no meaning to the parameters, failing to clarify the relationships between them or the purpose of each filter. Overall, the semantics are poorly explained.

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 'Get count' is a tautology—it simply restates the tool name ('getCustomerNotificationsCount') without specifying what is counted. It fails to mention that this is a count of notifications for a customer and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like listCustomerNotifications or getCustomerActivitiesCount.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the large set of sibling tools (e.g., listCustomerNotifications, markNotificationsRead, getCustomerActivitiesCount), there is no indication of the intended use case or comparisons, leaving the agent without context to select this tool.

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