Get recently published CVEs

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses two non-obvious behaviors: results are cached for 5 minutes (a freshness caveat), and the resolved date window is embedded in the cursor so a relative `days` window stays stable across pages while filters and pageSize are bound. Neither fact is derivable from the annotations or top-level schema.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the ordering and default window before pagination mechanics. The parenthetical `("published_desc")` and nested asides add some visual noise but every clause carries operational 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?

With 10 optional parameters, a nested CVSS object, and an output schema present, the description covers the things structured fields cannot: default window, window-size cap, mutual exclusivity, cache TTL, and the exact cursor round-trip protocol. An agent has everything needed to call and paginate correctly.

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 parameter baseline is 3. The description exceeds that by stating the cross-parameter constraint (days vs start/end mutual exclusivity, 120-day max) and the default lookback, none of which appear in the per-parameter schema text.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Return CVEs") plus the ordering dimension ("ordered by publication date, newest first"), which separates it from date-based siblings like nvd_get_modified_cves. It does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling tool (nvd_get_cves, nvd_search_cves), so differentiation is implied by scope rather than stated.

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?

It gives concrete usage rules: default 7-day lookback, and that `days` and `start`+`end` are mutually exclusive alternatives capped at 120 days. What it lacks is guidance on when to prefer this over nvd_get_cves or nvd_search_cves — no tool-level alternatives are named.

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