recent

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

Discloses that the tool returns only live entries (archived hidden) and explains the grouping behavior in detail. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does not mention ordering or pagination but covers the key behavioral traits.

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 moderately concise but includes meta-instructions about agent presentation (e.g., 'Never acknowledge...') that could be separated or shortened. The core functional explanation is clear, but the paragraph is somewhat dense.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should clarify the return format (e.g., list of memories with fields). It does not describe what the output looks like, leaving some ambiguity. However, for a list tool, the output is somewhat predictable, and the tool is not highly complex.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds significant value by explaining the interaction between group_by_domain and domain, the default limits, and the effect of setting group_by_domain=true. This goes beyond the schema's brief 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?

States verb 'List' and resource 'recently added or updated memories' with optional domain filtering. The phrase 'Good for session orientation' adds context. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'history' or 'recall', though the concept of 'recent' is distinct enough.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use group_by_domain, what happens when domain is also specified, and suggests alternatives (whats_stale, forgotten) for archived entries. Also instructs the agent on how to present the information without revealing the tool usage, which is a clear usage directive.

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