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

The description contradicts the readOnlyHint annotation by stating that setting mark_read:true will flag returned events read, modifying the persisted feed state. Since readOnlyHint indicates the tool does not produce side effects, this is a serious inconsistency, so the score is 1.

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?

Five sentences with no redundancy; front-loaded purpose, then return format, filtering, mark_read, and alternative access. Every sentence adds new information, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

Covers return payload, filtering options, mark_read effect, polling behavior, and alternative endpoint. With 5 optional parameters and no output schema, this is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 covers all 5 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds an example for type ('sec_8k'), explains the consequence of mark_read on future calls, and clarifies the 'since' filter, providing value beyond the schema.

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 opens with 'Pull fired events from your subscription feed', which clearly specifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'recent_changes' by focusing on subscription feed alerts and details the return payload, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It states 'Polls work fine' and notes an HTTP endpoint for scripts/dashboards, implying when to use the tool vs alternatives. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools or exclusions, so it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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