whats_new

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: oldest-first ordering, cursor-based pagination, effect of passing nothing, and the need to poll for backlog. It also notes the absence of a push mechanism, making the tool's read-only nature clear.

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 well-structured with a summary sentence, followed by detailed but compact explanations for each aspect. Every sentence adds value, and the tier indicator is a useful extra touch. It is as concise as possible given the complexity.

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 output schema, the description mentions key response fields (cursor, delivery) and references external documentation. It covers the core mechanics, but could provide a bit more structure for the response format. Still, it is largely complete for an AI 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all three parameters: `since` as cursor (id or timestamp), `kind` with enumerated filter values, and `limit` with default 20. It also explains the interaction between cursor and limit for pagination.

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 defines the tool as a forward log of shipped/published items, oldest-first, with a subscribe-equivalent usage. It distinguishes from typical 'most recent N' snapshots and sibling tools like guide, contact, or projects.

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?

Explicitly states when to call it: on session start and to catch up. Provides detailed polling instructions with cursor, including how to drain backlog. Mentions no push/subscribe mechanism and references additional documentation.

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