List Realtime Notices

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe, non-mutating read, so the description carries a lower bar, but it discloses nothing beyond the name — no scope of 'realtime', no freshness/streaming behavior, no pagination or volume expectations. It adds essentially no behavioral context.

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?

A single short phrase with no wasted words, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient packing — there is no front-loaded context or distinguishing clause.

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?

Because an output schema exists and readOnlyHint covers safety, the agent does not need return-value details. Still, the crowded sibling set of notice-listing tools means the description is too thin to let an agent confidently select this one over its near-neighbors.

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 there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies. No parameter semantics are missing.

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 gives a specific verb+resource (list realtime notices), which is clearer than a tautology. However, it offers no differentiation from the many sibling notice/notification tools (list_periodic_notices, list_expiry_notices, get_notifications, get_messages), leaving the agent to guess which scope applies.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to alternatives. With four or more sibling notice-listing tools, the agent must infer from the name alone when 'realtime' applies versus periodic, expiry, or general notifications.

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