feedbin_get_feed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read, but nothing is said about error behavior for unknown ids, whether the call is cached/rate-limited, or what 'metadata' comprises.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Brevity is appropriate, though the terse phrasing is under-specification rather than deliberate economy.

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, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description should at minimum explain how to obtain a feed id and roughly what metadata is returned. Neither is covered.

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 description coverage is 0% and agnostic — feed_id has only a title. The description repeats that a feed id is required but doesn't explain where to source it (e.g., from feedbin_list_subscriptions) or whether it matches the subscription's feed_id.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get feed metadata') scoped to an id, which is clearly distinct from siblings like feedbin_get_entry or feedbin_get_subscription. It doesn't explicitly name those alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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 on when to call this versus feedbin_get_subscription or feedbin_list_subscriptions, nor any prerequisite such as needing a feed id obtained elsewhere. Usage is only inferable from the name.

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