Retrieve the account's transportation notifications, including arrival and departure alerts with title, body, student, and timestamp.
List the account's transportation notifications — arrival/departure alerts (e.g. "arrived at school") with title, body, the student, and timestamp.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v0.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already declares safety, and the description adds valuable context about what the tool returns: title, body, student, timestamp, plus a concrete example. This enriches the annotation beyond simple read-only semantics.
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?
A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then efficiently appends the returned fields and an illustrative example. No filler or 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 zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description fully conveys what will be returned and the scope. No output schema exists, but the enumerated fields make the return shape predictable and sufficient.
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 is empty with zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately mentions the scope 'account's' without inventing parameters.
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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'transportation notifications' and clarifies the content type with examples. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling alphaportal_set_notification, which is the write counterpart.
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 establishes that this lists the account's notifications, making the use case obvious for retrieval. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the sibling set_notification makes the contrast clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.