get_unread_entry_ids

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the return format (flat integer array) and implies read-only via 'get', but does not mention authorization, rate limits, or potential large result sets. Adequate but not rich beyond basic behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds valuable context on efficiency. Perfectly concise for a simple tool.

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 zero parameters and an output schema present, the description adequately explains the function and benefit. Could mention sorting or that it returns all unread IDs, but overall sufficient. Contextual completeness is good for this simple tool.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (as there are none). The description adds no parameter info, but that is unnecessary. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not detract.

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 'Get the list of all unread entry IDs', specifies the output format (flat array of integers), and distinguishes from siblings like get_unread_entries by highlighting efficiency for IDs-only needs.

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 explicitly says 'More efficient than fetching full entries when you just need counts or IDs', guiding when to prefer this tool over get_unread_entries. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions beyond that comparison.

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