get_recent_activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the 'authenticated user' constraint, which implies authentication requirements, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it disclose any side effects, ordering, pagination, or return format. The description is minimal and does not add meaningful behavioral context beyond the obvious 'get' action.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word adds value, and there is no verbosity or redundancy. It is an example of appropriate minimalism.

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 tool has a simple structure with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description, while brief, covers the core purpose and user scoping. However, it does not describe the return structure, ordering behavior (beyond 'most recent'), or any limitations. Given the low complexity, this is adequate but not thorough, and could benefit from a bit more detail.

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 schema covers the single 'limit' parameter with a description ('Max number of entries to return'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not mention this parameter or add any additional meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents the parameter clearly.

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's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('activity log entries'), including scope ('most recent', 'for the authenticated user'). It is distinct from all sibling tools, which focus on SSH hosts, statuses, tunnels, and alerts, none of which relate to activity logs.

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?

The description provides clear context: this tool retrieves recent activity logs for the authenticated user. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the sibling tools are unrelated, so the intended usage is unambiguous. No exclusions are needed for a simple retrieval tool.

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