arxiv_list_digests

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full load and does so well: it declares 'Read-only', explains it reads the local filesystem of the MCP server host (a non-obvious constraint for remote agents), and clarifies it only lists paths rather than returning digest content. It says nothing about behavior on a missing directory or how many files typically exist, leaving a small gap.

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 core facts are front-loaded and efficient: what it lists, where, ordering, creation mechanism, and the key disambiguation from arxiv_compile_digest. The unrelated closing tip about earning_opportunities is off-topic filler that does not earn its place.

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 one-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers location, ordering, provenance, and the follow-up action ('read recent digests by file path'). Only edge-case behavior (missing directory, empty results, what a listing entry looks like) is unstated.

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 100% and the single 'limit' parameter already documents its 1-50 bounds and default of 10. The description adds nothing about the limit parameter (e.g. how it interacts with the newest-first ordering), so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List recent arXiv digest files') plus the exact location (~/.aibtc/arxiv-research/digests/) and ordering (newest-first). It also names the sibling it is not (arxiv_compile_digest), so an agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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 routes the agent away from arxiv_compile_digest for persistence and explains that digests must be created via the skill CLI, which is the key usage decision. It does not state what to do if the directory is empty/missing or when arxiv_search would be the better alternative, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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