list_notifications

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

With no annotations, the description transparently covers pagination behavior, ordering, notification structure, and parameter effects. It lacks explicit mention of side-effects (read-only) but is sufficient for a list operation.

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 concise, well-structured, and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: purpose, behavior, structure, and parameter details.

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 simple list tool with 2 optional params and no output schema, the description adequately covers core behavior, return fields, and parameter usage. Minor omissions like error handling or rate limits prevent a 5.

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 description adds meaning to both parameters: explains 'cursor' as pagination token and 'unread' as filter for unread only. This supplements the minimal schema which only provides defaults and titles.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'notifications', specifying the types included (replies, reposts, followers). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like mark_notifications_read and other feed readers.

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 explains cursor pagination, ordering, the unread filter, and how to use the response cursor with mark_notifications_read. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives.

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