Mark all as read

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description reveals the critical two-step process (confirmation token required) and irreversibility of the action. This adds significant behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide, such as the recovery impossibility.

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 sentences with no superfluous content. It front-loads the core purpose, then concisely explains the two-step process and the irreversible consequence. Every sentence is essential.

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 covers the main points: purpose, two-step mechanism, and irreversibility. However, it omits the 'older_than' date filter parameter, which modifies the scope of articles marked. Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema), this is a minor but notable gap.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it merely mentions the scope types (feed, category, label, stream) without clarifying exclusivity or the optional 'older_than' parameter.

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 marks all articles in a feed, category, label, or built-in stream as read, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'mark_articles' tool by indicating bulk operations, and the two-step process is explicitly mentioned.

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 implies the tool is for bulk marking but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like 'mark_articles'. It lacks clear guidance on when not to use it or which scope parameter to choose, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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