sw_get_notifications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that, adding scope ('current user') and recency ('recent') context. However, it does not disclose output format, ordering, pagination, or how the view parameter changes behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, and every word contributes to the agent's understanding of what the tool does.

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?

This is a simple, read-only retrieval tool with one fully documented optional parameter, so the description is mostly sufficient. The main gap is that there is no output schema and the description does not clarify the return shape, but 'notifications' is understandable enough for 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the only parameter, 'view', is fully documented with enum values, defaults, and response-shape details. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the schema carries the burden and the description meets the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get recent Splitwise activity notifications for the current user.' It clearly identifies the tool's target and scope, and none of the sibling tools handle notifications, so there is no ambiguity with alternatives.

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 the intended use clear: retrieving the current user's recent activity notifications. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives, but no sibling tool serves this purpose, so the context is sufficient for an agent to select it.

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