whats_new

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

Discloses read-only nature, no side effects, auth, or rate limits, and explains error behavior for invalid formats. Also mentions return of total_est_tokens and the caveat about mtime-driven changes, covering important behavioral traits beyond the schema.

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 paragraph with front-loaded purpose, followed by compact details. Every sentence conveys necessary information without redundancy, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

Given no output schema, the description effectively explains the return value (rows plus total_est_tokens) and covers all input parameters, use cases, and limitations. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds value by explaining date format specifics for 'since', defaults for include_tags and limit, and the semantics of project_id (KB only vs everything). This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'List files created or modified since a checkpoint', which is specific and distinct from siblings like list_files and search. The description reinforces the use case for catching up at session start, differentiating it from general listing tools.

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?

Provides explicit usage context ('Use at session start to catch up') and caveats (hard-deleted files not surfaced). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools for other scenarios, which would improve guidance.

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