Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
node-notifier

node-notifier

by Ardor303
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list_notifications

Read-only

Inspect current desktop notification reminders, acknowledgements, and asynchronous delivery or audio errors for this MCP connection.

Instructions

Inspect current reminders, acknowledgements and asynchronous delivery/audio errors for this MCP connection.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_notifications"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by enumerating what the read surfaces (reminders, acknowledgements, asynchronous delivery/audio errors) and by bounding the scope to 'this MCP connection', which is meaningful given there is no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence with the scope ('this MCP connection') and the returned content front-loaded. There is no filler, hedging, or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only, local tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the one thing the structured data cannot: the categories of items returned. Minor omissions remain, such as ordering, result limits, or whether errors are cleared on read, but the essential picture is complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering or selection inputs are needed, though it adds nothing further about parameters because none exist.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Inspect') with a clear resource ('current reminders, acknowledgements and asynchronous delivery/audio errors') and scopes it to 'this MCP connection'. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like list_notification_profiles or acknowledge_notification, so the differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Inspect' and by the fact that the tool takes no parameters, so it reads as a passive status check. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no routing to acknowledge_notification for acting on a reminder versus simply reading it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools