Get notifications

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return structure (subject, message, posted, read, url), ordering (newest first), the effect of limit, the unread count, and the authentication source (MCP settings headers). This is strong transparency, though it omits edge cases like empty results.

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 compact and front-loaded. It opens with the purpose, then packs essential behavioral details into a few sentences without fluff. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

For a simple one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers output structure, ordering, limit behavior, unread count, and authentication. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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?

The input schema covers the only parameter (limit) with a description ('Max notifications to return.'). The tool description adds 'caps the count,' which is essentially a restatement. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3; no significant additional semantics are provided.

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 'Get the student's Moodle notifications' and gives concrete examples (assignment due reminders, grading, forum posts). It distinguishes from siblings like list_announcements and get_grades by referencing the notification bell, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to fetch the notification bell) but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The scope is clear, but there's no explicit routing guidance beyond the implied distinctness from siblings.

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