get-recent-changes

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

The description discloses return fields ('timestamps, change types, page titles, authors, size deltas, and edit summaries') and scope ('across wikis'), but does not mention pagination behavior, sorting, or that it is a read-only operation. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, leaving some behavioral aspects undocumented.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return data, then use case. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff, making it an ideal length.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete on behavioral aspects like pagination (continue_from token), default limits, and the time window for 'recent.' While schema covers parameter details, the overall workflow (e.g., how to iterate through pages) is not explained.

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%, so all parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'across wikis' which aligns with the wiki parameter but does not enrich understanding of parameters like limit or continue_from.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get a feed of recent edits, page creations, and log events across wikis.' This uses a specific verb (get) and resource (recent changes feed), and differentiates from siblings like get-page-history by emphasizing 'across wikis'.

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 provides a clear usage context: 'Useful for monitoring wiki activity.' It implies when to use the tool but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get-page-history. This is clear context without formal exclusions.

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