linear_markAllNotificationsAsRead

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lacks details on side effects, irreversibility, authorization needs, or what happens to notifications (e.g., does it mark unread only?). The minimal description does not fulfill this burden.

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 a single sentence, extremely concise and well-structured. However, it borders on under-specification, missing key details. It earns its place but could incorporate more information without losing brevity.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the limit parameter's effect on operation scope, leaving the agent unaware of how to control the batch size.

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 input schema has a single 'limit' parameter with 0% description coverage. The description provides no information about this parameter, leaving the agent without any semantic meaning beyond the schema's type and constraints.

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 'Mark all notifications as read' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating it affects all notifications. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'linear_markNotificationAsRead' (singular) by using 'all', making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'linear_markNotificationAsRead'. The description does not explain the limit parameter or clarify conditions under which this bulk operation is appropriate.

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