get_recent_items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the ordering guarantee ('most recent first'), which is real value, but says nothing about result limits, window of 'recent', or pagination — meaningful gaps for a feed-style tool.

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?

One tight sentence that front-loads the account scope, the resource, the cross-course span, and the sort order. Nothing is wasted.

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 structure needn't be explained, and safety is covered by annotations. What remains thin is the definition of 'recent' and any cap on results — useful but not strictly required to call the tool correctly.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there are no inputs an agent could misinterpret, and the description correctly presents this as a no-argument call.

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 ('Get ... recently-accessed course modules') and defines scope ('across all courses'). It implicitly separates itself from get_recent_courses by naming modules rather than courses, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the 'recently-accessed ... across all courses' framing suggests this is a cross-course activity feed rather than a per-course listing, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g., get_recent_courses).

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