Unraid API notifications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with those. The description adds modest context by saying the response includes counts, a page, and current warnings/alerts, but it does not disclose operational details like auth needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and lists the three result components economically, making every word meaningful.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description provides a reasonable high-level summary of the return payload. However, with no output schema and no explanation of filter semantics or how this differs from sibling notification tools, an agent could still struggle to choose and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation, but it does not. The phrase 'bounded filtered page' vaguely hints at the filter's role, yet it never explains the nested filter object, the UNREAD/ARCHIVE type enum, offset, limit, or importance. The schema's property names carry most of the semantic weight.

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 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: notification counts, a filtered page, and current warnings/alerts. It is unambiguous about what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like unraid_list_notifications.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the many sibling alternatives such as unraid_list_notifications or the next_* subscription tools. The description implies this is a direct query rather than a subscription, but it never states exclusions or selection criteria.

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