notifications_mark_all_read

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations and schema, specifying that the tool clears the 'whole' set and returns the row count. It also reinforces the self-scoping boundary which is essential for behavior.

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 brief yet highly effective, front-loading the core functionality and including key behavioral constraints in a highly readable, two-part format.

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?

The definition is exceptionally complete. It clarifies what the tool does, what the agent should know about its execution (row count return), and critical security boundaries, providing everything needed for accurate invocation.

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?

Despite having 0% schema description coverage, the description provides high semantic value by defining the critical constraint around 'userId' (must be the caller's own). This is essential context for using the required parameters.

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 defines the action ('clears the caller's whole unread set'), the resource (unread notifications), and the specific output ('answers how many rows moved'). This is unambiguous and distinguishes the function.

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 critical usage boundaries, most notably the security constraint: 'userId must be the caller's own (forbidden otherwise).' This explicit scope constraint prevents incorrect tool usage and potential security issues.

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