mark_all_notifications_read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states the tool marks all notifications as read but omits details about idempotency, reversibility, or side effects. For a mutation tool, these are important behavioral traits that are missing.

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 concise with one main sentence and one sentence for auth requirement. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description provides the core action and a requirement. However, for a write operation, it lacks completeness on return values, confirmation, or potential errors, leaving some gaps.

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 tool has no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the empty schema, but none is needed. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 every notification as read' and specifies the resource 'for the authenticated user'. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling 'mark_notification_read' which operates on a single notification.

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 only mentions an authentication requirement ('Requires IWMM_API_KEY') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'mark_notification_read'. No context on when not to use or prerequisites beyond the API key.

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