wallos-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get notification settings

get_notification_settings

Read-only

Retrieve an account's notification channels, reminder lead time, and enabled status so you can verify where and when subscription reminders are sent. Credentials remain masked.

Instructions

Which notification channels this account has set up (email, Discord, Gotify, ntfy, Pushover, Telegram, webhook, ServerChan), how many days ahead reminders go out, and whether each is enabled. Wallos masks the credentials.

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": "get_notification_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful non-obvious context that Wallos masks credentials, though it does not cover permissions or empty-state behavior.

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?

Two compact sentences are front-loaded with the returned settings and end with credential-masking behavior. The channel list is long but directly useful for identifying supported integrations.

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 tool with no output schema, the description identifies the returned fields and credential-masking behavior. It does not specify the exact response shape or empty-state behavior, but is complete enough to call correctly.

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 has zero input parameters and an empty schema, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline score of 4 applies, and the description appropriately does not invent parameters.

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 enumerates the exact notification settings returned: supported channels, reminder lead time, and enabled status. This makes the resource unambiguous, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as get_settings or update_settings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_settings or update_settings. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the read-only annotation.

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