meta-agent-tools

Feed find

feed_find

Read-onlyIdempotent

Does this site publish a feed? Answers with every feed known for a domain — the question a reader or an agent actually asks. Find feeds by text, format, language and availability. Filter and text search run in the SAME full-text query: values inside one parameter are OR'd, different parameters are AND'd. Without q the order is by newest in the index (recentes) and next_cursor is a keyset — follow next to walk everything. With q the order is relevance and paging is by offset. We index and link; the feeds belong to whoever publishes them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dominio`	Yes	Domain, with no scheme: example.com
`retry_key`	No	Optional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 15, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / api_pass

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "MAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 17, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / api_pass

Added value: +{
+  "description": "MAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / retry_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: ordering by recency without `q` vs relevance with `q`, keyset vs offset paging, and an ownership/attribution note ('the feeds belong to whoever publishes them'). This is meaningful context the annotations do not provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The lead question is well front-loaded, but the body is long and mixes paging mechanics, filter semantics, and licensing asides. Several clauses reference non-existent parameters, so the length is not fully earned.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, so the description must carry return-value burden, and it partly does (ordering, cursor vs offset). However, the mismatch between described filter/paging parameters and the actual two-parameter schema leaves the agent unsure what it can actually pass.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the two real parameters (dominio, retry_key), so the description owes little. Worse, it describes a rich set of parameters (`q`, format, language, availability, `next_cursor`, `next`, `offset`) that do not exist in the input schema, which is misleading rather than additive.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (find feeds) and frames the real question ('Does this site publish a feed?'), scoping it to a domain. It is clear what the tool returns, though it never names the obvious sibling (feed_search) to distinguish itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives some context ('the question a reader or an agent actually asks') and explains paging/ordering behavior, but never states when to use this versus feed_search or feed_posts. Usage is implied rather than explicit, and the filter parameters it describes are not usable per the schema.

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

All meta-agent-tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?