get_recent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions sorting (newest first) and category scope, but does not address rate limits, pagination, error handling for invalid categories, or the default max_results value. The presence of an output schema partially compensates, but more detail would be helpful.

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 consists of two concise sentences, with the purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and usage guidance in the second. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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, 1 required) and the existence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers the core functionality and usage context. However, the lack of detail about max_results is a minor omission, and the description could briefly mention that results are limited and search 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning for the category parameter with examples (cs.AI, quant-ph), which is helpful. However, it does not mention the max_results parameter at all, leaving its purpose and default behavior undocumented. Since there are only two parameters, missing one is a significant gap.

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 retrieves the most recent papers in a given category, sorted by submission date, and provides examples. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., search_arxiv) by focusing on 'latest submissions' and 'what is new' queries, but could be more explicit about differentiation.

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 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,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not specify when not to use it or list alternative tools.

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