mark_scan_as_read

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the action without disclosing side effects, such as whether it affects unread counts, if it is reversible, or any prerequisites. The behavioral impact is minimally described.

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 one short sentence, efficient and front-loaded. However, it could include more context without losing conciseness, such as the effect on the item's status.

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 mutation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context like what 'read' means and any consequences. The sibling tools list is large but the tool is simple.

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 a clear description for scan_id. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond 'by its scan ID'. Baseline of 3 applies since the schema already documents the parameter fully.

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 action ('mark as read'), the resource ('a recent scan item'), and the identifier ('scan ID'). It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like 'list_recent_scans' and 'get_unread_scan_count'.

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 usage after listing recent scans (referencing scan ID from list_recent_scans) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative tools are mentioned.

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