kyt_recent_screenings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation through the verb 'List' and describes the returned fields, but it does not explicitly state that no side effects occur, how results are ordered, or any access/rate-limit considerations. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first states the action and scope, the second gives a practical use case and the output fields, making the description easy to parse and front-loaded.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is nearly complete: it covers purpose, usage context, and return fields. It lacks explicit mention of ordering or time-window semantics beyond 'recent', but for a one-parameter read tool this is a minor gap.

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?

There is only one parameter, limit, and the schema description coverage is 100% (default 20, max 200). The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but since the schema fully documents the parameter, 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 recent screenings performed by your organisation.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like kyt_screen_wallet (performing screenings), kyt_stats (aggregate stats), and kyt_list_cases (case listings). The mention of returned fields further clarifies the tool's scope.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Useful for catching up on what teammates or automated pipelines have been screening.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for an agent to understand the intended scenario.

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