Уведомления ЕЛК

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds little beyond a field list: it does not say whether results are ordered by date, whether only unread are returned, how `limit` truncates, or whether reading affects the read flag — all real questions for a notification feed.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical locating the feature in the UI is genuinely informative rather than padding. Slightly terse for a tool description, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description does useful work by enumerating return fields (title, text, date, importance, read status). However it omits ordering, freshness, and whether unread status is filterable — gaps an agent would hit in practice.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema ('Максимум уведомлений', default 20, max 100), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about limit semantics (ordering, truncation, paging).

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 names the resource ('Уведомления ЕЛК') and pins it to a concrete UI element ('колокольчик в шапке, lk.hse.ru/notification'), which makes the object unambiguous. But there is no verb — it never says it fetches/lists them — and it does not distinguish this from look-alike siblings such as lms_list_messages or elk_list_requests.

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 statement of when to call this versus lms_list_messages, elk_list_requests, or my_today, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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