unarchive_notification_context

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

Description claims idempotent, contradicting annotation idempotentHint=false. DestructiveHint=true suggests mutation, but description says returns count 0 when no archived remain, which is not destructive. Major inconsistency lowers score.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with verb and resource. Zero wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Output schema exists but description only mentions return count, not full response. Contradiction on idempotency undermines completeness. DestructiveHint unaddressed.

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 covers 100% of parameters. Description adds 'in a notification context' mapping to contextId, but no additional semantics beyond schema's 'a string that will be trimmed'.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Unarchive' and resource 'all archived inbox notifications in a notification context'. Distinguishes from siblings like unarchive_notification (singular) and archive_notification_context (opposite action).

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?

Description notes idempotency but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives (e.g., unarchive_notification for single notification). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites provided.

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