get_recent

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

Discloses the sorting behavior (newest first) and purpose. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not detail behavior for invalid categories or error handling, but for a simple read-only tool the disclosure is adequate.

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 front-loaded action. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 (2 params, output schema exists) and sibling context, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, when to use it, and sorting behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning by providing example category values (cs.AI, quant-ph). However, it does not describe the max_results parameter beyond the schema's default. Partially compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 the verb 'Get' and resource 'most recent papers' with specific examples (cs.AI, quant-ph). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like search_arxiv by focusing on recency and sorting by submission date.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when the user wants to see the latest submissions in a specific arXiv category' and 'Ideal for what is new style queries.' However, it does not mention when not to use or contrast with alternatives like search_arxiv.

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