list_recent_articlesList the most recently published articles from this publication.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 5, max 20) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| total | No | ||
| articles | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "articles": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "date": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "slug": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "summary": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "slug",
+ "title",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "total": {
+ "type": [
+ "integer",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "articles"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying recency and publication scope, but it does not disclose additional traits such as ordering details, time windows, or pagination 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states exactly what the tool does without any filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the meaning.
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 read-only list tool with one fully documented optional parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. An agent has enough information to select and 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 description coverage is 100%, so the limit parameter is already fully documented with its default and maximum values. The description does not need to add parameter detail, and it does not, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List the most recently published articles from this publication.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like popular_content and search_articles, which target popularity or search queries rather than chronological recency.
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 clearly implies when to use the tool—when a listing of recently published articles is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as popular_content or search_articles, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.