get_latest_rss

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses storage separation, time-flow presentation, token-saving behavior of include_summary, and maximum limits for days and limit. It does not mention potential side effects or permissions, but as a read-only getter, this is reasonably transparent.

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 well-organized with a short summary, an Args list, Returns, and Examples. Each section is purposeful, and the content is dense without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 has four parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, return format, examples, and operational context (storage separation, time flow). It is highly complete and actionable.

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 no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the description provides thorough semantics for all four parameters: feeds with examples and default behavior, days with default and max, limit with default and max, and include_summary with its token-saving intent. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 that the tool retrieves the latest RSS subscription data with multi-day query support. It explicitly differentiates RSS data from hot-list news ('RSS 数据与热榜新闻分开存储'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_latest_news and get_trending_topics.

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 provides clear context for when to use it: '适合获取特定来源的最新内容' (suitable for getting latest content from specific sources) and mentions separation from hot news. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, lacking exclusion guidance.

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