feedbin_list_starred

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing and specifies that entry ids are returned, but does not mention authentication requirements, pagination behavior, rate limits, or ordering. For a list endpoint, this is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the operation and the return scope efficiently.

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 low complexity, zero parameters, and absence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate because it states the return value ('entry ids'). However, it omits useful context such as pagination, ordering, and whether authentication is needed, which an agent might reasonably want to know before calling.

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 are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not create confusion.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('starred entry ids'), making the operation clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like feedbin_list_entries or feedbin_star_entries, but the 'starred' qualifier and 'ids' output scope imply differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as feedbin_list_entries, feedbin_list_unread, or feedbin_star_entries. It merely states what the tool does, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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