get_notificationsFetch recent notifications covering new expenses, payments, comments, and group activity so you can stay informed of account updates.
Get recent notifications for the current user (new expenses, payments, comments, group activity).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains scope but does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether authentication is required, or any limits on recency or result count. The categories add some context, but the safety profile is left implicit.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and scope with no wasted words. Every element adds useful information.
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 zero-parameter read with an output schema present, the description covers the essential selection context: current user, recency, and event types. The only minor gap is the unquantified meaning of 'recent', but this does not block correct 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?
There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately avoids inventing parameter details and focuses on the output scope.
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 names a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('notifications'), a scope ('current user'), and a timeframe ('recent'). It also lists the kinds of events covered, which clearly separates it from siblings like get_comments or get_expenses.
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 makes clear this returns the current user's recent notifications, which implies when to use it. There is no obvious sibling alternative for notifications, so explicit when-not-to-use guidance is less necessary; the context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.