wiki_recent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default window (14 days) and the verified/updated semantics, but says nothing about read-only status, result ordering, pagination, or volume limits for what could be a large set.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the selection criterion, with the default and the tool's role packed into a short em-dash clause. 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?

For a one-parameter query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the essentials (what is returned and the default window) are covered, but ordering, pagination, and the read-only nature of the operation are left for the agent to assume.

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?

The single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate and largely does: it defines 'days' as a lookback window and states the default of 14. It does not clarify whether the window is calendar or rolling, or any upper bound.

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 the resource (pages) and the precise selection criterion (verified/updated within the last N days), and the 'freshness view' framing signals how it differs from a generic page list. It stops short of naming wiki_list_pages as the non-freshness alternative, so differentiation is semantic rather than explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by 'the freshness view' and the time-window criterion, so an agent can infer this is for recency questions. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion of the sibling list/search tools, and no guidance on choosing a window size.

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