cigchat_announcements_read

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('mark as read') but provides no information about side effects, authentication requirements, idempotency, or what happens to the announcement. Given zero parameters, it's unclear how the target announcement is identified or what the system considers 'read'.

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 extremely concise: 'Mark announcement as read [POST /announcements/read]'. It front-loads the action and includes the endpoint for reference. Every element earns its place; no wasted words.

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 0-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the core action but lacks context about how the announcement is selected, any preconditions, or what the response might be. Still, given the simplicity, this is a reasonable baseline.

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?

With zero parameters, there is nothing for the description to explain. The 0-params baseline is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details. The empty input schema already conveys that no arguments are required.

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 clearly states the verb+resource: 'Mark announcement as read', making it obvious the tool marks an announcement as read. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like cigchat_notifications_read, which performs a similar 'read' action on a different resource.

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 alternatives. It does not mention the distinction between announcements and notifications, nor does it provide any context for when marking an announcement as read is appropriate. The usage must be inferred solely from the name and description.

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