list_notifications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns an audit log with pagination and filtering, but does not describe behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with empty results. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that communicates the core purpose, result type, and key features without any wasted words. It is appropriately concise.

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 the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and filtering options. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings and does not elaborate on the response format or potential errors, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description confirms filtering by event type (type) or timestamp (since) and notes pagination, but does not add meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions. The 'after' and 'limit' parameters are not explicitly mentioned in the description, but the schema covers them.

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 lists the operator's notification audit log and enumerates the types of attempts (delivered, failed, skipped). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_notification_preferences (preferences) and test_notification (testing).

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 explains pagination and filtering but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisitess or exclusions. Usage is implied but not directly compared to siblings.

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