list_picks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state ordering; newest first, and implies read-only listing, but it does not explain whether it destroys anything, how it handles empty state, or if there are side effects. For a simple list read this is adequate but thin, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single short Korean sentence is concise and front-loaded with the core behavior: viewing recent picks with ordering. It does not waste words or repeat schema information, although it could have included a tad more context without becoming bloated.

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 one-parameter listing tool without an output schema, the description states the relevant ordering (newest first) and recency of items, but the word 'picks' is not clearly defined in the context of these sibling tools. Simple enough that an agent might infer it, but there is room to specify output shape or edge cases.

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?

The only parameter 'limit' has a full description in the schema ('how many, default 10'), covering 100% of parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning for the limit parameter, so the baseline score of 3 applies without bonus.

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 'recently picked places, newest first' clearly identifies the task as listing picks in reverse chronological order. It distinguishes from sister tool latest_pick by implying multiple items rather than a single newest one, though it could be more explicit about that contrast.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like latest_pick or clear_picks. The phrase 'recently picked' hints that it is appropriate for seeing recent entries, but it does not state circumstances, exclusions, or why an agent might select it over a sibling tool.

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