postit.recent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the recursive traversal and recency-based ordering ('most-recently-modified'), but it does not mention limit semantics, default directory behavior, or explicitly confirm read-only status. This is partial but not complete transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key behavioral detail.

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 output schema likely documents return values, and the description covers the primary retrieval purpose and recursive scope. However, it lacks usage context and parameter details, making it minimally viable rather than fully complete for an agent deciding how to invoke it.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives context for 'dir' by saying 'under dir,' but the 'limit' parameter is entirely unexplained, including its meaning or default behavior. Only one of the two parameters receives any semantic clarification.

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 returns 'most-recently-modified postits' and includes the scope 'always recursive under dir,' which distinguishes it from sibling listing tools like postit.ls and postit.read. The verb 'Return' and resource 'postits' make the operation unambiguous.

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 given about when to choose this tool over alternatives like postit.ls or postit.search. The phrase 'always recursive under dir' describes behavior but not the intended use case or exclusions.

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