bookmarks_get_recentGet recently added Chrome bookmarks, newest first. Specify how many to retrieve and choose text or JSON output for easy review.
Return recently added bookmarks, newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | ||
| format | No | Output format: text = human-readable list, json = raw BookmarkTreeNode data | text |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the behavioral detail of newest-first ordering and the 'recently added' filter, which is useful context beyond the schema. No contradictions.
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 sentence of eight words, perfectly front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by the ordering detail. Zero waste.
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?
For a read-only list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It doesn't mention that the result is limited (default 20) or that format affects structure, though these are in the schema. It could hint at when the json format is useful.
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 50% (format has a description, count does not). The description adds nothing about parameters; it doesn't explain count limits, default behavior, or how format affects output. With half the parameters undocumented, the description should compensate but doesn't.
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 clear verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('recently added bookmarks'), and an ordering ('newest first'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like bookmarks_get_tree or bookmarks_search by focusing on recency, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.
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 on when to use this tool versus siblings. It doesn't mention alternatives like bookmarks_search for finding specific bookmarks or bookmarks_get_tree for hierarchy, nor any conditions that would make this tool the preferred choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.