wetrack_list_notifications

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses pagination, authenticated-user scoping, filter categories, defaults, and the limit maximum. It does not describe the output shape, but an output schema exists, so that is not a serious gap.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a concise bullet-style parameter list. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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 output schema exists and all parameters are documented, the description is complete for a paginated listing tool. It covers the user scope, filters, defaults, and limit, so an agent can invoke it correctly without missing context.

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 provides no parameter descriptions, but the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: status values, category values, project UUID filtering, page, and limit with max and defaults. This gives the agent everything needed to construct valid arguments.

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 and resource: retrieve paginated notifications for the authenticated user. It is clear what this tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related notification siblings like wetrack_get_unread_notification_count or wetrack_mark_notification_read.

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 purpose implies a listing use case, and the parameter defaults make behavior predictable, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over sibling notification tools. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer usage, but no alternatives or exclusions are stated.

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