rss_fetch_feed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool fetches items and returns specific fields, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not mention caching, rate limits, or how many items are returned (the count parameter). The description is adequate but minimally detailed.

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 single sentence that front-loads the purpose with the '[rss]' prefix. It is concise and to the point, though the prefix may be unnecessary. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description covers the basic purpose and return format but omits parameter semantics and usage context. Without explaining parameters or differentiating from siblings, the description feels incomplete for an agent to confidently use 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?

The input schema has two parameters (url, count) with 0% coverage in descriptions. The description does not explain the 'url' or 'count' parameters at all. The agent must rely on parameter names alone, which is insufficient for proper invocation.

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 clearly states the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'RSS or Atom feed URL', and specifies the return content (titles, links, summaries). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rss_list_feeds (lists feeds) and rss_read_feed (reads feed details) by focusing on fetching items.

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?

The description implies usage for fetching latest feed items but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like rss_list_feeds or rss_read_feed. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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