getNotifications

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

The description correctly implies a read-only operation, consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds minor context about notification types but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations already provide (e.g., openWorldHint).

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 a single succinct sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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 read tool with no required parameters and full schema coverage, the description is adequate but lacks explicit clarification of what 'recent' means (e.g., time window). No output schema exists, but the output is likely straightforward. Overall, it meets minimum completeness but could be slightly more informative.

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 tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond the input schema, which already has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for page, page_size, and unread_only. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly identifies the action ('get') and resource ('recent notifications') with specific types listed in parentheses (approvals, payouts, messages), distinguishing it from sibling tools like listBrandCampaigns or getEarningsSummary. However, it does not specify the scope or context further.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and sibling set.

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