list_notifications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state whether listing notifications modifies their read state, how pagination behaves, or what authentication is required. The word 'list' hints at non-destructive behavior but lacks explicit assurance.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning the maximum score for conciseness.

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 paginated listing tool with no output schema, the description underspecifies key details such as what 'recent' means, whether unread/read filtering is possible, and the response format. Given the abundance of notification-related sibling tools, the description lacks the contextual depth needed for reliable tool selection.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for 'page' (0-based) and 'per_page', so the description does not need to add parameter details. The tool description provides no extra semantic value beyond the temporal qualifier 'recent', which is a minor addition to the schema information.

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 'notifications' and adds the temporal scope 'recent', clearly stating the tool's function. It is unambiguous and can be easily distinguished from sibling tools like mark_notification_read, despite not explicitly naming 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus notification-related alternatives such as get_unread_count or mark_all_notifications_read. The description simply states the action without providing context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage on its own.

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