notifications_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the GET method (implying idempotent read), the 35-day limit, and the response structure (array of objects). Side effects, error handling, and rate limits are not mentioned, but the core behavior is clear.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds distinct value (purpose+endpoint, time constraint, response format). No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema exists), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, a key constraint, and response structure. It could be enhanced by noting the default sorting order or iterative pagination process, but the existing content is sufficient for correct use.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how to use the page parameter for pagination or the endpoint path substitution for project_id.

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 explicitly states the verb 'list', the resource 'notifications', and the scope 'for your project', with the endpoint path. It differentiates from siblings like notifications_get (single notification) and notifications_create.

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 mentions the 35-day availability window, which is a key constraint. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as notifications_get for a specific notification, nor does it mention pagination iteration strategy.

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