baasix_mark_notification_seen

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It communicates that a state mutation occurs, but it does not disclose whether marking is idempotent, affects unread counts, requires specific permissions, or returns a result.

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 efficient, verb-first sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool, though it provides no additional structural framing or context.

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 one-parameter tool, the description plus full schema coverage is minimally viable. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves gaps around usage context, side effects, and expected result that an agent would benefit from knowing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the only parameter 'id' as a Notification ID. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: it marks a notification as seen. It is understandable and distinguishable from siblings like list_notifications and send_notification, though it mostly rephrases the tool name without adding extra scope or detail.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, what precedes it, or how it relates to alternatives such as list_notifications or send_notification. The use case is only implied by the name and description, not explicitly laid out.

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