limitless_list_recent_lifelogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions sorting ('newest first') and the nature of the data ('raw log data'), which adds useful context. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or what the response format looks like (e.g., structure of returned logs). This leaves gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 concise and well-structured with two sentences: the first states the core functionality, and the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with key information.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and usage but lacks behavioral details (e.g., response format, error handling) and doesn't fully compensate for the absence of structured output information. For a list tool with 4 parameters, it's adequate but has clear gaps in transparency.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters (limit, timezone, includeMarkdown, includeHeadings). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining how 'limit' interacts with 'recent' or the implications of the boolean flags. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 purpose: 'Lists the most recent logs/recordings (sorted newest first).' It specifies the verb ('lists'), resource ('logs/recordings'), and sorting behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'limitless_list_lifelogs_by_date' or 'limitless_list_lifelogs_by_range' beyond mentioning 'recent' and 'newest first.'

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 provides clear usage context: 'Best for getting raw log data which you can then analyze for summaries, action items, topics, etc.' This implies when to use it (for raw data analysis) but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among the sibling tools, such as when date-based filtering is needed.

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