Unread count

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the per-stream granularity, which is meaningful context beyond the annotations, but says nothing about freshness, caching, or whether counts are affected by read state changes.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and result. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it borders on under-specification rather than fully optimized brevity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value details need not be explained, and the description correctly scopes the result to per-stream counts. It is adequate for a simple 0-param read tool, though it omits any note about which streams are included or authentication expectations.

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 a 0-param tool is 4. Nothing in the description is needed or missing here.

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 (Return) and resource (unread counts) with a scope qualifier (per stream). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like freshrss_stream_contents (returns items, not counts) and freshrss_subscription_list, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the many other read-oriented siblings (stream_contents, categories, subscription_list). No exclusions, prerequisites, or context is implied beyond the resource name.

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