Get your AniList notifications

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-idempotent behavior, and the description adds specific details: markAsRead resets the unread badge as a side effect, and type_in only filters results without affecting which types are generated (controlled by account notificationOptions). It also explains type-dependent field structures, going well beyond the annotations.

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 only two sentences and front-loaded with the login requirement. The first sentence efficiently lists capabilities; the second is a bit dense with nested examples but each part adds value. Slightly complex sentence structure keeps it from a 5.

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?

Given an output schema exists and the description covers the essential behavior (login, notification types, side effects, type-dependent fields, filter nuance), it is fully complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. Nothing critical is missing.

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% with each parameter (page, perPage, type_in, markAsRead) already having detailed descriptions. The tool description doesn't add new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 fetches the authenticated user's AniList notifications and enumerates the notification types (airing, likes, replies, mentions, followers, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_user_activity and get_activity, which handle general activity feeds rather than notifications.

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 says '[Requires login]' and specifies this is for the authenticated user, clarifying when to use it. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the focus on notifications versus activity is clear from the description and sibling context.

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