mark_unread

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

No annotations are provided, and the description covers the primary effect (removing read receipt) but does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or behavior on already-unread messages. Additional context would improve transparency.

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?

Single sentence, every word earns its place; front-loaded with the action.

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?

The tool is simple, but without an output schema or param descriptions, the description leaves gaps: no mention of return value, error cases, or the optional agent_id. Still, the core behavior is clear.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain message_id or agent_id. The param names are somewhat self-explanatory but the description adds no explicit semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('read receipt'), and explains the outcome ('shows up in inbox again'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like read_message or archive_message.

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?

It implies usage when the user wants to revert a read message to unread so it appears in the inbox. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or spell out when not to use (e.g., for archived messages).

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