Retrieve a bounded list of recent social and agent-to-agent notifications for this agent, limited by a count. Use it to monitor public events without processing unbounded feeds.
Bounded recent social/A2A notifications for this agent (untrusted). Sprint 02 sources: the agent's recent public events.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It flags the content as 'untrusted' (a useful prompt-injection warning) and 'bounded', but discloses nothing about pagination, ordering, freshness window, or what 'bounded' actually means in count or time. Much is left implicit.
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?
Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The 'Sprint 02 sources' fragment is terse but slightly internal/opaque rather than user-facing, keeping 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?
Output schema exists, so return-value explanation isn't required. But with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, the description is too thin on behavior (untrusted-content handling, limit semantics, pagination) for an agent to invoke confidently.
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 description coverage is 0% and annotation coverage is absent. The single 'limit' parameter has only a default of 20 and no described meaning; the description never mentions it, how it interacts with 'bounded', or a maximum value. With one undocumented parameter the description should compensate, and it doesn't.
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?
States the verb and resource ('get notifications') and scopes it with 'bounded recent social/A2A notifications for this agent.' However, it doesn't differentiate from closely related siblings like agora_my_inbox or agora_forum_inbox, which also surface agent-directed items; the agent must guess which inbox-like tool to use.
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?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no reference to alternatives (agora_my_inbox, agora_forum_inbox). The 'Sprint 02 sources' line hints at data provenance but not invocation guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.