list_feedsList the curated design & photography feeds (id, title, category, source). Optionally filter by category (design, photography) or keyword. Pass an id to read_feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | Keyword to match in feed title/source/description. | |
| category | No | Filter by category: design, photography. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "category": "design"
+ },
+ {
+ "query": "typography"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds context about curated feeds and returned fields but no behavioral traits beyond annotations, which is acceptable as annotations cover safety.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence defines scope and output, second sentence covers options and alternative tool.
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?
Tool is simple with 2 optional params and no output schema. Description mentions returned fields, which is sufficient. No mention of pagination/limits, but not critical for this tool.
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 coverage is 100%, but description adds the allowed category values ('design, photography') not present as enums in schema, enhancing semantic understanding.
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?
Clearly states 'List the curated design & photography feeds' with specific fields returned, and distinguishes from sibling read_feed by noting 'Pass an id to read_feed'.
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?
Provides guidance on optional filters and directs to read_feed for a specific feed. Could be more explicit about when not to use, but adequate for a simple list tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.