Recently modified pages

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add ordering and scope details. It implies a modification-time ordering but never states sort direction, tie-breaking, whether system pages are excluded by default, or the default result count of 15 — all things an agent would want to know before calling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant restatement of the title. It is efficient, but the brevity comes at the cost of content that would have earned its place.

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?

This is a simple zero-required-parameter read tool with a readOnly annotation and no output schema, so limited prose is defensible. Still, the implicit-default question (are system pages included?) and the undocumented limit parameter leave gaps an agent may hit on first call.

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 67%: prefix and include_system are documented in the schema, but limit carries no description at all, and the tool description does nothing to clarify it (no mention of default, max, or that it caps result count). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List ... pages') and narrows scope to 'most recently modified', which is clearer than a bare listing tool. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling list_pages or search, so an agent must infer the difference from names alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing says to prefer this over list_pages when ordering by recency, or to use search when filtering by content. The agent is left to infer selection from the sibling names.

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