List OPML imports from Feedbin to review and manage previously uploaded subscription files. Use it to check import history and identify which OPML files have been processed.
List OPML imports.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet 'List' is the only behavioral signal (implying a read). It says nothing about whether imports are paginated, how many are returned, whether completed imports are included, or any auth requirement.
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?
Four words, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is under-specified rather than verbose, which is a completeness problem, not a conciseness one.
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?
Although the tool is structurally simple and has no output schema, the agent still learns nothing about what an import record contains (status, timestamps, counts) or how many are returned. For a list endpoint with no annotations and no output schema, those omissions matter.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.
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 (List) and resource (OPML imports), which is enough to distinguish it from feedbin_create_import and feedbin_get_import by name alone. It stops short of saying anything about scope or contents, but the purpose itself is 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?
There is no indication of when to call this rather than feedbin_get_import (single import by id) or the other list tools, and no prerequisites or follow-up guidance. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.