browse_moments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states the return contents (title, date, linked discussion ID) and the auth requirement (no token). It does not mention ordering, pagination behavior, or the meaning of 'active,' leaving some ambiguity.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the return summary plus auth note are immediately useful.

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 simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it explains what is returned, the resource type, and authentication. Minor gaps like the definition of 'active' and ordering are not critical for invoking 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 only parameter, 'limit,' is fully documented in the input schema with a default and description. The tool description adds nothing about the parameter, but the high schema coverage makes this acceptable; baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Browse') and resource ('recent moments'), and clarifies that moments are 'news/events in AI history.' It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like get_moment or react_to_moment.

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 implies usage: this is for browsing a list of recent public moments, and 'No token needed' signals it can be called without authentication. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over get_moment or when not to use it.

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