gmb_notifications_accounts_getnotificationsetting

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP GET method and the fact that it returns settings, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as pagination or error handling. With annotations present, the added value is moderate.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the HTTP method and resource. It contains no unnecessary words and is well-structured for quick scanning.

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?

For a simple get tool with full schema annotations and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the primary return value ('pubsub notification settings'). It could possibly mention the resource name pattern, but that is fully documented in the schema. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and invocation.

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%, with all 5 parameters fully described in the input schema. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns pubsub notification settings for an account, using a specific verb ('Returns') and a specific resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like gmb_notifications_accounts_updatenotificationsetting, which updates the same settings.

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 implies this is the read/get operation for notification settings, and the context is clear given the HTTP GET method and the resource type. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, though the sibling update tool is somewhat self-evident.

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