List recently updated pages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose useful behavioral traits: a default look-back window, newest-first ordering, and that it does not consume page budget. It does not describe the returned page format or any limits beyond the schema, but for a simple read-only list tool this is solid transparency.

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 short sentences carry the core behavior, the primary use case, and a key operational constraint with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one fully documented optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behaviors: what is listed, the time window, ordering, and budget impact. It could be more complete by describing what fields/details appear in the returned page list, but it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single 'days' parameter is already documented with type, range, and default. The description only repeats the default window, adding no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('pages'), with a defined time window and sort order ('last N days (default 7), newest first'). It does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_notes or get_index, but the 'recently modified' framing makes its distinct purpose reasonably clear.

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 gives clear usage context with 'Good for what changed lately' and adds a practical benefit ('Does not count against the page budget'). However, it does not mention when not to use it or point to alternative sibling tools, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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