List My Notifications

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail by explicitly guaranteeing it 'does not clear unread.' This addresses a common side-effect expectation for notification endpoints and clarifies the bot-specific scope beyond the annotation.

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 short sentences front-load the resource scope, then add the key behavioral caveat. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail.

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 list tool with two optional, well-described parameters and readOnly annotations, the description sufficiently covers scope and side effects. It doesn't describe result fields, but no output schema exists and the enumerated notification types give a reasonable sense of the content.

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 description coverage is 100%, with `limit` and `filter` fully described. The description provides no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'The bot's OWN notifications (mentions, replies, likes, PMs)' — clearly indicating this lists notifications rather than messages or topics. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing the bot's own scope, though it doesn't explicitly name or contrast alternatives.

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 as a safe, read-only peek and states it 'does not clear unread,' which gives useful context. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling tools like discourse_list_private_messages or discourse_search, nor any exclusion criteria.

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