get_unread

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

Since annotations are absent, the description rightly discloses key behaviors: messages are marked as read after retrieval, response includes 'has_more' flag, and behavior differs with background service. This adds valuable transparency.

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 relatively concise and front-loads the main purpose. It could be slightly shorter, but every sentence adds value and it avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return values (has_more) and behavioral details. It sufficiently explains the tool's behavior for an agent to use it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'limit' parameter. The description adds a hint about pagination ('call again with a higher limit'), but the schema already explains it as max messages to return. The added value is marginal.

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 tool gets new unread messages, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'receive_messages', which serves a similar purpose.

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 provides clear guidance: 'Always use this to check for new messages.' It explains behavior based on whether the background service is running. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or describe alternatives.

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