get_recently_added

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the 'across all libraries' scope, which is useful context beyond the name. However, it does not disclose the return format, ordering behavior (beyond 'most recently added'), or the effect of the limit parameter, which are relevant for an agent invoking the tool.

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 a single, focused sentence that communicates the tool's purpose without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to understanding the tool.

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 relatively simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description does not explain what the return value looks like (e.g., list of book objects, fields included). With no output schema, the description should have provided a bit more detail about the response structure or ordering to be fully complete for an agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100% (the 'limit' parameter is fully described with type, default, min, and max). Thus, the description adds no parameter-level information, and the baseline score of 3 applies. The description also does not contradict or expand on the schema.

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 function: retrieving the most recently added books across all libraries. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('books'), and the 'across all libraries' scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_books or get_book. This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 implies a clear use case (obtaining recently added books without filtering), but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. Sibling tools like search_books are not referenced, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the name and description alone.

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