npm_recent_changes

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

The description adds meaningful context beyond the annotations by identifying the specific source (replicate.npmjs.com) and warning about intermittent availability. It does not detail pagination or return format, but the reliability warning is valuable behavioral information.

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 two sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a necessary caveat. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and strong annotations, the description is largely complete. It states the source and warns of availability issues. Omitting response structure is acceptable given the lack of an output schema and the tool's straightforward nature.

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 input schema already fully documents the `limit` parameter (default 25, max 100). The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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's function: retrieving recent package publishes/updates from the npm registry via the CouchDB changes feed. The verb 'Get' and resource 'npm registry' are specific, and it is easily distinguished from sibling tools like npm_search or npm_registry_stats.

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 implies the tool is for recent changes but does not explicitly specify when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. The availability note about replicate.npmjs.com is a caveat, not a usage guideline. No direct comparison to sibling tools is provided.

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