find_recent_changes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond that: it uses the search API with last_modified_on_or_after, returns items most recently amended first, and caps at 10,000 results. No contradictions.

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?

Four tight paragraphs, each carrying distinct information: purpose, method, constraints, and a usage pattern. No filler or repetition; the most important detail is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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?

Given read-only annotations, an output schema, and 5 parameters, the description covers the key operational constraints: date format, result cap, filtering, and intended use. It could add pagination details or per_page semantics, but overall the agent has enough to select and invoke it 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains since_date format and that title/chapter/part can narrow results, but does not clarify per_page behavior or the default title=48, leaving some parameters underspecified.

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 states a specific verb ('find') and resource ('CFR sections modified since a date'), with clear scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on recent modifications and sorted recency, unlike search_cfr or get_version_history.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: checking for regulatory updates affecting acquisitions. It advises narrowing with title/chapter/part filters when needed, but does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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