Skip to main content
Glama

Mark notifications read

mark_messages_read
Idempotent

Clears notification badges on subscribers' devices while keeping messages in the server cache, so they remain readable with list_messages. Use it to dismiss alerts without deleting them.

Instructions

Clears notifications on subscribers' devices. The messages stay in the server cache and remain readable with list_messages — that is the whole difference from delete_messages, which also leaves them there but tells subscribers to remove rather than to clear.

Needs ntfy 2.16.0 or newer. Against an older server every id comes back with ok:false inside a result that is not an error — check the per-id results rather than only whether the call succeeded.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNoTheir topic. Defaults to the first NTFY_TOPICS entry.
sequence_idsYesIds of the notifications to clear.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicYes
resultsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover idempotency and non-destructiveness, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: messages remain in server cache, are still readable via list_messages, and older servers return per-id ok:false results without an overall error. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core behavior, followed by a useful sibling distinction and a version-specific warning. Every sentence contributes operational value without unnecessary padding.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the output schema and annotations, the description is complete: it covers behavior, the key alternative, version constraints, and a subtle failure mode. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no significant parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Clears notifications on subscribers' devices') and a clear resource. It also distinguishes itself from delete_messages by explaining the exact behavioral difference, so an agent can tell which tool to use.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly contrasts this tool with delete_messages, explaining when each is appropriate. It also adds a version requirement (ntfy 2.16.0 or newer) and warns about per-id result checking, giving clear operational guidance.

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