get_vibe_feedback

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve all' implies read-only behavior and complete results, which is helpful, but it does not mention authentication, pagination, result shape, or any side effects. The description is adequate but not deeply 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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action, then covers optional filtering and intended use, with each sentence earning its place.

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 simple read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and usage context. It could be more complete by describing the response shape or any default limits, but nothing critical is missing for a likely straightforward list operation.

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 input schema already documents both parameters with 100% coverage, including their types, ranges, and default behavior. The description merely restates 'filter by minimum rating or sort by rating' without adding meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('all vibe feedback entries'), making the core action clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_favorites or rate_vibe, but the resource is specific enough to avoid major confusion.

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 phrase 'Useful for understanding user preferences' provides a general intended use case, which implies when this tool might be relevant. However, it does not offer explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like get_favorites or get_user_hint.

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