Fetch new articles across all feeds. Set a limit to control the number returned.
Most recent articles across all feeds.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "recent"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'across all feeds' and does not mention ordering, freshness window, pagination, or any limitations. The description adds little beyond what the tool name already implies.
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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant statements. It is easy to scan and gets the core idea across quickly. The brevity comes at the cost of behavioral detail, but it is appropriately concise for a simple tool.
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?
The tool is simple and has an output schema, but with no annotations and no sibling differentiation, the description is not fully complete. An agent has little guidance for choosing this over 'trending' or 'digest,' and no information about default sorting or response shape. The output schema helps fill some gaps, but the description remains under-specified for confident selection.
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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'limit' parameter at all. The schema provides the type and default, and the parameter name is fairly self-explanatory, but the description itself adds no parameter-level meaning. It partially compensates by being about a simple single-parameter tool.
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 that the tool returns the most recent articles and scopes it 'across all feeds,' which is clear enough to convey the basic purpose. It lacks an explicit verb like 'list' or 'get,' but the intent is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like search, trending, or digest.
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?
There is an implied use case: fetch the newest articles from all feeds. However, the description provides no explicit 'when to use this vs. other tools' guidance, and it does not mention alternatives such as trending or digest. The usage context is minimal and largely inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.