Browse the public recents feed of shared documents.
No authentication required. Returns recently shared public documents, newest first.
Args: page: Page number (default 1) limit: Items per page (default 20, max 100)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses authentication requirements, return content, ordering, and pagination behavior. It doesn't explicitly say 'read-only' or mention failure modes, but for a simple feed, it's transparent enough.
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?
Extremely concise and front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, second sentence covers behavior, then a clean argument list. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.
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?
With an output schema present, the description correctly focuses on inputs and behavioral context. It covers scope, ordering, pagination, and authentication, making it fully sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains both parameters: 'page' as page number with default, 'limit' as items per page with default and max (100). This adds meaning beyond the raw schema.
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 the specific verb 'Browse' and clearly identifies the resource as 'public recents feed of shared documents', distinguishing it from siblings like create, delete, update, share, and list. The scope is unambiguous: recently shared public documents.
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 clear context: public feed, no auth required, and newest-first ordering. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, but the 'recents' focus inherently differentiates it from other doc tools, making the intended use evident.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
CRUD operations (create/update/delete/list) are clearly distinct, and share/recent have clear purposes. However, 'recent' could be confused with 'list' (workspace vs public feed), and 'publish_markdown' overlaps with create+share. Descriptions help clarify these boundaries, so most tools are unambiguous.
The auteng_docs_* pattern holds for create/delete/list/share/update, but 'auteng_docs_recent' uses an adjective instead of a verb, and 'auteng_publish_markdown' breaks the pattern by using verb-first naming and omitting 'docs'. The mixed conventions are still readable but not fully consistent.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a markdown publishing and document sharing server. Each tool earns its place covering CRUD, sharing, a public feed, and a publish shortcut, without redundancy or bloat.
The toolset covers the core lifecycle (create, update, delete, list) and sharing, but lacks a single-document get tool to retrieve content by path. This is a minor gap since list provides paths and update can be done with full content, so agents can work around it.