list_notifications

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

Given no annotations, the description adds value by noting that nodes carry '__typename' for branching and that unread_only restricts to unread notifications. However, it does not mention pagination behavior (despite after/first params) or user/workspace scoping clearly.

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 very concise: two sentences plus a code snippet. Every sentence adds value and the key point (listing notifications) is front-loaded.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to cover three out of four parameters, which have no schema description. The tool has moderate complexity (4 params, pagination) and the description is incomplete for efficient use.

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 0%, so the description should explain all parameters. It only documents unread_only (its effect), but omits explanations for after, first, and workspace, which are critical for proper usage.

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 notifications in the viewer's inbox, which is a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like get_notification (single) and notifications_unread_count (count).

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 implies usage for listing inbox notifications and explains the unread_only parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_notification or mark_notification_read.

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