list_notifications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only repeats the list operation and gives content categories; it does not state whether listing notifications changes read state, whether it is read-only, or what response shape to expect. Given the sibling mark_notifications_read, the read-state behavior is a meaningful unspecified trait.

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?

One short sentence with a parenthetical category list; every word earns its place and the core resource and scope are front-loaded. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 parameterless list operation, the description is mostly complete: it identifies the resource, user scope, and notification types. It is not fully complete because it omits return/read-state behavior, but the lack of an output schema and parameters lowers the burden.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, there is no parameter ambiguity for the description to resolve. The description appropriately adds no parameter text, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List notifications') and scopes it to the logged-in user, listing included categories. It is not a tautology and is clearly distinct from topic/message tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling list_private_messages, which also involves PMs.

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 phrase 'for the logged-in user' provides a clear context, so an agent can infer this is the current user's notification feed. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over mark_notifications_read or list_private_messages, and no when-not-to-use conditions.

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