get_notifications

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

The description discloses the significant side effect 'Automatically marks retrieved notifications as viewed' and notes pagination, which is crucial behavioral information given no annotations. However, it doesn't mention rate limits or response format, so it's not fully transparent.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant content.

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 list operation, the description covers the core functionality and the notable side effect. It doesn't describe the return structure or failure modes, but the clarity of purpose and the disclosure of marking as viewed make it reasonably complete for an agent.

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?

Both parameters (limit and cursor) are fully described in the schema, so the description doesn't need to explain them. The mention of pagination aligns with the cursor parameter but adds no new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 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 'Get the authenticated user's notifications' with a specific verb and resource, and mentions pagination, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_new_notification_count and get_feed. The scope is unambiguous.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like get_new_notification_count and get_feed exist, but no comparison or exclusion is mentioned. The usage context is only implied.

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