Recent Activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds two useful behaviors: the default window is 7d and courses with no activity are omitted. It says nothing about how limit truncates results or what include_inactive changes.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then the parameter detail and the use-case trigger. Compact with little waste, though the line-break layout is slightly choppy and the ordering of the 'courses without activity' note is a bit arbitrary.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the purpose plus the `since` semantics are clear. However, half the input surface (limit, course, include_inactive) is unexplained, and the interaction between 'courses without activity are left out' and include_inactive is left for the agent to infer.

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% across 4 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It documents only `since` (relative age format like 24h/7d/2w, or ISO date) and its default; `limit`, `course`, and `include_inactive` are left entirely undefined in both schema and prose.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with a qualifying scope: list posts with *new activity* since a time, across all active courses or one course. The 'new activity' qualifier meaningfully separates it from plain list_posts/get_posts, though the description never names those siblings.

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?

Gives a concrete usage trigger ('what did I miss this week'), which tells the agent the intended question shape. It stops short of naming alternatives (list_posts, get_post_history) or stating when this tool is the wrong choice.

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