Subscription list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that - no note on scope, pagination, or whether it returns all accounts' feeds - so it contributes no new behavioral context.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is tight and readable, though its very brevity is what leaves the other dimensions thin.

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 no-argument, read-only list tool with a full annotation set and an output schema that documents the return shape, the definition is essentially adequate. Only a brief note on scope (all subscriptions across categories/accounts) would round it out.

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, which is the baseline-4 case per the rubric, and the empty object schema with additionalProperties:false is unambiguous. There is nothing for the description to clarify about inputs.

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 ('feed subscriptions'), so an agent immediately knows what the tool returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from adjacent siblings such as freshrss_stream_contents or freshrss_ingest_subscriptions, which also deal with subscriptions/feeds.

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 offers no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives even though several siblings (freshrss_ingest_subscriptions, freshrss_subscribe, freshrss_unsubscribe) operate on the same subscription domain. Usage is left entirely to inference.

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