recent

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses newest-first ordering and optional filtering, but omits read-only confirmation, pagination/limit behavior, and any auth or rate-limit context.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted text. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the example use case is brief and helpful.

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 output schema covers return values, and the description conveys the main retrieval behavior. Still, with no annotations and no schema parameter descriptions, the omitted limit/default semantics leave meaningful gaps for a simple but four-parameter tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for all four parameters. It mentions the days window and topics/channels filters, but does not explain the limit parameter, default values, or the expected array format for topics/channels.

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 resource and scope: posts from the last N days, newest first, with optional topic/channel filters. It does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling search_posts tool, which keeps it from a 5.

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 example 'what happened this week in agents' implies a useful recency-based use case, and the optional filters suggest narrowing by topic/channel. However, it does not say when to use this instead of search_posts or other siblings, nor does it state exclusions.

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