github_activity_get_feeds

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states only 'Get feeds' with no indication of what data is returned, whether the operation is read-only, or any other behavioral characteristics. This is critically insufficient.

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 extremely brief (two words), but this brevity comes at the cost of under-specification. It is not efficient communication because it fails to convey necessary information, making it closer to an omission than conciseness.

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 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide sufficient context about the nature of the feeds being retrieved. It does not, leaving the agent with no useful information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 has no parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. According to the guidelines, the baseline for high coverage is 3, and the description adds no additional parameter information, maintaining the baseline.

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 'Get feeds' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without adding any specificity. It fails to indicate what type of feeds (e.g., news, activity, user-specific) or how this tool differs from the many other 'get' operations in the sibling list.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description offers no context about appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for selection.

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