Get Notification Log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what the log contains, whether it is paginated, how far back it goes, or how it differs from get_notifications. With annotations carrying the bar, this is a bare restatement with no added behavioral context, and it does not contradict the annotations.

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?

It is a single short phrase with no waste, which is appropriately sized. However, brevity here shades into under-specification rather than crisp conciseness, since the one sentence carries almost no information beyond the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and with no parameters there is little else to document. Still, the description fails to distinguish this log from the crowded set of sibling notification/log tools, which is the one piece of context an agent actually needs here.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no input is needed, though it adds nothing further.

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 states a verb and resource ('获取...日志' / get ... log) for 推送通知 (push notifications), but it is essentially a translation of the title and offers no differentiation from close siblings such as get_notifications, list_realtime_notices, or get_messages. An agent cannot tell from this text alone what distinguishes a 'push notification log' from those other notification tools.

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 the many notification- and log-related siblings. No preconditions, no scope, no alternatives are named, leaving selection entirely to inference from the name.

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