cigchat_notifications_read

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals this is a POST mutation (not a read-only operation despite the 'read' in the name), but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, authorization needs, or error behavior when notification_id is invalid.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and includes the endpoint. There is no fluff, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not mention what the response looks like, how to obtain notification_id (e.g., from cigchat_notifications_recent), or any post-conditions. The minimal information is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke and interpret the result.

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 has 100% coverage for notification_id, but the description is only an example UUID, not a semantic explanation. The tool description adds no parameter context beyond what the schema provides, so it scores at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Mark notification as read') and the resource ('notification'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cigchat_notifications_recent (likely a listing tool) and cigchat_announcements_read (targets announcements, not notifications). The explicit HTTP endpoint adds further specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites such as obtaining notification_id from a list operation. The description simply states the action without any contextual usage instructions or exclusions.

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