paper_changes_since

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only time-scoped delta, but discloses nothing about result caps, ordering, whether it requires an existing watch/snapshot baseline, or rate limits — all material for a change-feed tool with a 'watch' parameter.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though the brevity here leans toward under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, 1 required) and an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, with no annotations and an undocumented 'watch' parameter, an agent lacks enough context to invoke it confidently when a watch is involved.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds useful format semantics for 'since' (ISO date), but the 'watch' parameter is completely unexplained — the agent cannot tell whether it is a watch identifier, a name, or a filter, and it is the only optional parameter on the tool.

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-phrase and resource: 'New papers/preprints detected since an ISO date.' An agent immediately knows this is a delta/change-detection query over papers. However, it does not differentiate itself from adjacent siblings such as search_papers, snapshot_papers, or changes_feed, which look similarly relevant to an agent choosing a tool.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus search_papers (search by query), snapshot_papers (baseline capture), or the umbrella changes_feed. Nothing tells the agent whether a prior snapshot_watch/snapshot_papers call is a prerequisite, or what happens if no baseline exists.

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