skool_notifications

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. 'Tries the Next.js notifications page data route' hints at a fragile or unofficial implementation path, but it does not explain auth requirements, failure behavior, rate limits, or whether the operation is strictly read-only. The word 'Tries' signals unreliability without clarifying consequences.

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 short and front-loaded with the primary purpose. The second sentence adds implementation context, though it is vaguer than ideal. Overall, it is efficient and has no redundant filler.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description is minimally sufficient, but it lacks details about what the returned notifications look like, how pagination behaves, and what happens when the Next.js data route fails. Since there is no output schema, some of this burden falls on the description.

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 100% because the only parameter, 'page', is described as 'Page number'. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail about pagination or how the page parameter interacts with 'recent notifications', so the schema already carries the necessary information and the description adds little beyond it.

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 and resource ('Get recent notifications') and clearly identifies the tool's subject, distinguishing it from siblings like skool_members_list and skool_posts_list. The added 'Tries the Next.js notifications page data route' introduces some uncertainty but does not obscure the core purpose.

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 purpose implies the tool should be used when an agent needs recent notifications, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over alternatives or any preconditions. No sibling tool directly duplicates notifications, so the usage context is implied rather than stated.

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