List and filter Feedbin entries by read status, starred state, date, or IDs, with pagination and optional enclosures or content diffs; HTML content is truncated for concise results.
List entries. HTML content/summary truncated to 500 chars. ids is a comma-separated list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ids | No | ||
| mode | No | ||
| page | No | ||
| read | No | ||
| since | No | ||
| starred | No | ||
| per_page | No | ||
| include_original | No | ||
| include_enclosure | No | ||
| include_content_diff | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that HTML content/summary is truncated to 500 chars and gives the ids format, but says nothing about pagination behavior with page/per_page, how mode/since filters behave, or the defaults applied when the null-valued params are omitted.
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?
Three short sentences with no filler and the truncation caveat front-loaded, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than economy given a 10-parameter 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?
A 10-param listing endpoint with no annotations, no output schema, and no schema descriptions needs far more than one line about ids. Key behaviors (pagination, filter interactions, include_* effects, default page size) are missing entirely.
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 there are 10 parameters, so the description must compensate and instead covers only one (ids). The critical filters (mode, since, read, starred, per_page) and the include_* toggles are entirely undocumented, leaving their semantics and defaults opaque.
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?
"List entries" restates the tool name with no scope, no object detail, and no differentiation from the many sibling list tools (feedbin_list_feed_entries, feedbin_list_unread, feedbin_list_starred, feedbin_list_recently_read). Only the truncation note adds any information about what comes back.
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?
There is no statement of when to use this over feedbin_list_feed_entries, feedbin_list_unread, feedbin_list_starred, or feedbin_list_updated_entries. The agent must guess which listing endpoint fits its case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.