list_notifications

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

The description says 'List' which implies a read-only operation, but the annotation readOnlyHint is false, indicating the tool may not be read-only. This is a direct contradiction. The description also fails to disclose any potential side effects (e.g., marking notifications as read). Given the annotation contradiction, the description is severely lacking.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The scope and usage are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The description is simple and gives the core purpose, but it omits any mention of side effects or the contradiction with the annotation. An agent might be uncertain whether calling this tool alters notification state. For a zero-parameter tool, this is still a notable gap given the annotation mismatch.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it correctly implies that no arguments are required.

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 verb ('List'), the resource ('desktop notification history'), and the scope ('system-wide (all apps)'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like read_notifications, clear_notifications, and send_notification by specifying it lists all notifications across all apps.

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 a clear usage context: 'Use when the user asks to see recent notifications or missed alerts.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like read_notifications for individual notifications. It provides context but lacks exclusion guidance.

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