Mark Notification Read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces the mutating nature of the action. It adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying the prerequisite organization context and the source for the notification ID.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every sentence contributes either the action, the ID source, or the prerequisite call.

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 single-parameter mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, where the parameter comes from, and the required setup. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

The schema already fully documents notificationId as the Public ID (GUID), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by telling the agent to obtain this ID from list_notifications, which helps with correct invocation.

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: 'Mark one notification as read.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from mark_all_notifications_read by specifying 'one,' and it tells the agent where to get the identifier (list_notifications).

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 provides clear usage context: get the id from list_notifications and call set_context first. It does not explicitly call out mark_all_notifications_read as the alternative for bulk operations, but the 'one' wording implies the distinction.

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