feedback_summary

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description 'Get summary' aligns with that but adds no further behavioral context, such as what the summary includes, how 'recent' is defined, or any side effects. With annotations present, the description fails to provide additional transparency.

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 sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is so short that it lacks sufficient detail to be fully useful. It is minimally adequate but could be expanded without losing 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?

Given the tool has one optional parameter, annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the nature of the summary, how to use the 'recent' parameter, or what return format to expect. Among many sibling tools, more context is needed to judge suitability.

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 one optional number parameter 'recent' with 0% schema description coverage. The description only mentions 'recent feedback' but does not explain the parameter's purpose or how it affects the output. The description does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 summary of recent feedback' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (summary of recent feedback), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like 'feedback_stats' or 'reflect_on_feedback', which also deal with feedback summaries.

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. There is no mention of when to prefer this over 'feedback_stats' or 'reflect_on_feedback', nor any exclusion criteria or context for appropriate use.

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