meta-agent-tools

Feed posts

feed_posts

Read-onlyIdempotent

What has this feed published? The posts of one feed as our queue read them — title, date, author, summary, categories and enclosure, without the body. Find the feed first (feed_find or feed_search); this takes an id from this index, never a URL. Up to 40 posts, in the order the feed publishes them, WITHOUT the body — the body of one post comes from /items/:ord. It is OUR copy, read on our own schedule — not the live feed and not a proxy: the only thing this endpoint accepts is an id from this index, never a URL. lido_em says when we read it. Empty list when the feed has not been read yet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Feed id, prefix fd_.
`api_pass`	No	MAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.
`retry_key`	No	Optional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds substantial context: result cap (40), publication ordering, body exclusion, that it is OUR snapshot copy rather than a live feed/proxy, and the empty-list behavior when unread. This is well beyond what annotations 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?

Front-loaded with a clear framing question, but the same constraints are stated twice ('never a URL' twice, 'WITHOUT the body' twice), making it needlessly repetitive. The core signal is strong, but the wording is padded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description compensates fully by enumerating returned fields (title, date, author, summary, categories, enclosure) and their exclusions (no body), plus the empty-list case. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning to the id param by stressing it must be an id from this index and never a URL, and hints at the snapshot semantics ('lido_em says when we read it'), but it does not extend the api_pass or retry_key parameters.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('the posts of one feed... without the body') and enumerates returned fields. It clearly distinguishes itself from feed_find/feed_search (finding the feed) and from the single-post endpoint, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit prerequisites (find the feed first via feed_find or feed_search) and an explicit constraint ('takes an id from this index, never a URL'). It also names the alternative for the body ('/items/:ord'), covering when this tool is and is not the right choice.

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

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?