recents

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral traits. It only states the action without disclosing if the operation is read-only, what sorting is applied, or any side effects. Critical details like whether it accesses local or networked resources are missing.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence front-loaded with the purpose. However, it omits necessary details, making it under-specified rather than efficiently comprehensive.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide context about return format, pagination, or default behavior. It lacks any such detail, leaving the agent to guess the tool's behavior.

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 50%: the 'vault' parameter is described, but 'total' is not. The description adds no parameter information, failing to compensate for the missing schema descriptions. The agent gets no help understanding the 'total' boolean.

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 'List recently opened files' clearly states a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'files' which lists all files. However, it does not mention the scope (Obsidian vault) explicitly, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'history_list', 'files', or 'search'. The absence of any context about appropriate use cases makes it difficult for an AI agent to select correctly.

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