github_notifications_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value: explicit sort order, the field semantics of `reason` and `url`, and the endpoint-specific `per_page` cap, none of which appear in the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope. The reason/url and per_page notes are useful but the per_page point duplicates the schema, costing a bit of efficiency.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully volunteers the meaning of key return fields (`reason`, `url`) and the ordering. It stops short of describing pagination behavior or the array shape, leaving minor gaps for a listing tool.

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 every parameter including the 50-cap on perPage is already documented in the schema. The description's per_page note merely echoes the schema text and adds no new parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("List your unread notifications") and enumerates the kinds returned (mentions, review requests, assignments), plus the sort order. No sibling tool competes for this role, so the agent can identify it immediately.

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?

Provides a clear motivating scenario — "how an agent finds out it is needed without polling repositories" — which tells the agent when this beats checking repos directly. It does not name specific alternative tools or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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