message_mark_read

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

Description adds value beyond annotations: explains that messages leave the inbox (state change) and implies a read-only effect consistent with destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true. No contradiction.

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?

Concise at three short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose and usage. The Args section repeats schema slightly but serves as a quick reference. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter behavior, and result. Could mention the output schema content but not required per rules.

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%, but description reinforces the parameter's optional behavior and the effect of omitting IDs, adding practical usage context beyond the schema's description.

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 action ('mark messages as read') and the effect ('leave the inbox'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like message_inbox (retrieve) and message_send (send).

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?

Explicitly advises to call after processing from message_inbox(), and provides two usage modes: specific IDs or omit for all unread. This gives clear when-to-use and how-to-use guidance.

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