aiarena_replays_recent

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the cost profile ('[FREE]', 'No payment required') and the shape of each returned item (CID plus anchor tx), which is genuine behavioral context. It does not state ordering, freshness window, or pagination/limit behavior for a list endpoint.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the free-tier marker and the resource, followed immediately by the sibling routing hint. Nothing is redundant and every clause adds information.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, returned fields, and the sibling alternative, which is nearly everything an agent needs. The only meaningful gap is the undocumented limit parameter and the freshness/ordering of 'recent'.

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?

There is one parameter (limit, default 10) with 0% schema description coverage, so the description is the only place its meaning could be clarified. It never mentions the limit, its maximum, or how it interacts with the listing, leaving the agent to infer from the name.

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 specific verb and resource ('List recently anchored AIARENA match replay proofs') and names the payload of each item (IPFS CID + Base anchor tx per match), so the agent knows exactly what it gets back. It is clearly separable from aiarena_replay_proof, which is called out as the single-match variant.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this for a recent listing, use aiarena_replay_proof(mid) when you need the full proof bundle for one specific match. No explicit 'when-not' guidance (e.g. how far back 'recent' reaches or whether it can be paged), but the primary alternative is named with the condition that selects it.

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