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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself, but it only restates the action in shorthand: 'Discover syndication feeds on a site.' There is no mention of what the tool actually does with the input, whether it scans a page, what it returns, or any side effects, though the output schema may cover return values.

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 a compact single line that front-loads the resource type and the action. The leading 'RSS / Atom Feeds:' label adds useful specificity but is mildly redundant with 'syndication feeds,' so it is not maximally tight.

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 no annotations and a single essential parameter, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what value to put in q, whether omitting q is meaningful, or which site-related siblings this should be preferred over. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for missing input/usage context.

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 schema has one undocumented parameter q at 0% description coverage, and the description does not explicitly define q. The phrase 'on a site' hints that q is a site or URL, but it is ambiguous (domain vs full URL) and does not explain the default empty string.

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 states a clear action ('Discover') on a clear resource ('syndication feeds on a site') and narrows the domain to RSS/Atom. It does not explicitly contrast with nearby siblings like sitemap or pageinfo, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given for when to choose this tool over alternatives, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The intended use is only implied by the purpose phrase, which is not enough for an agent deciding among the many discovery-style sibling tools.

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