Skip to main content
Glama
mcollina

GitHub Notifications MCP Server

mark-thread-read

Mark GitHub notification threads as read to manage your inbox and reduce clutter. This tool helps you clear specific notifications by thread ID.

Instructions

Mark a GitHub notification thread as read

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
thread_idYesThe ID of the notification thread to mark as read

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that marks the specified GitHub notification thread as read by patching the GitHub API endpoint. Handles success and error responses.
    export async function markThreadReadHandler(args: z.infer<typeof markThreadReadSchema>) {
      try {
        // Make request to GitHub API
        await githubPatch(`/notifications/threads/${args.thread_id}`);
    
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Successfully marked thread ${args.thread_id} as read.`
          }]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          isError: true,
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: formatError(`Failed to mark thread ${args.thread_id} as read`, error)
          }]
        };
      }
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for the tool: a single string 'thread_id'.
    export const markThreadReadSchema = z.object({
      thread_id: z.string().describe("The ID of the notification thread to mark as read")
    });
  • Function exported to register the 'mark-thread-read' tool with the MCP server, providing name, description, schema shape, and handler.
    /**
     * Register this tool with the server
     */
    export function registerMarkThreadReadTool(server: any) {
      server.tool(
        "mark-thread-read",
        "Mark a GitHub notification thread as read",
        markThreadReadSchema.shape,
        markThreadReadHandler
      );
    }
  • src/server.ts:41-41 (registration)
    Call to the registration function during server initialization to add the tool to the MCP server.
    registerMarkThreadReadTool(server);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but doesn't cover critical aspects like required permissions (e.g., authentication needs), side effects (e.g., whether this affects notifications elsewhere), or response behavior (e.g., success/failure indicators). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's mutation nature, lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral traits like authentication requirements, error handling, or what happens upon success, which are crucial for an agent to use this tool effectively in a real-world context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'thread_id' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline score for high schema coverage without adding value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

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') and the resource ('a GitHub notification thread'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from its sibling 'mark-thread-done' or other mark-read variants like 'mark-notifications-read' and 'mark-repo-notifications-read', which prevents a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid thread ID), exclusions (e.g., not for marking multiple threads), or comparisons to siblings like 'mark-thread-done' or 'mark-notifications-read', leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mcollina/mcp-github-notifications'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server