Get Recent Changes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is well-covered. The description adds behavioral context about what types of changes are included (kunngjøringer for companies, role/ownership for persons) but does not discuss pagination, rate limits, or error handling.

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 packed with essential information: purpose, scope, example usage, and pairing suggestion. No wasted words; front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains input parameters and use case. It could benefit from a brief note on return format (e.g., list of change objects with date, type), but the annotations and sibling context partially compensate.

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 covers 75% of parameters with descriptions and constraints. The description adds semantic nuance for entity_type (explains what changes are listed per type) and provides examples for category (konkurs, fusjon, eierbytte). However, this is incremental; the schema already does a good job.

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 clearly states the tool lists changes (kunngjøringer for companies; role + ownership movements for persons) for a given entity over a specified period. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_company (current state) or search_announcements (broader search).

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 an explicit use case: monitoring a target entity for triggers with an example question. Suggests pairing with subscribe_company for push notifications. Lacks explicit exclusion cases (e.g., when not to use this versus get_company or search_announcements), but the context is clear.

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