search_rss

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a search operation (implied read-only), mentions default values and constraints (days max 30, limit default 50), and specifies the return format (JSON list). However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized. It starts with a clear purpose statement, then provides detailed parameter explanations in a bullet-like format, followed by return information and practical examples. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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's moderate complexity (5 parameters, search operation) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, parameters, and basic behavior well. The main gap is lack of explicit mention about whether this is a read-only operation or if it has side effects.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining all 5 parameters in detail. It clarifies that 'keyword' is required, explains the meaning and default behavior of 'feeds', specifies constraints for 'days' (default 7, max 30), 'limit' (default 50), and the boolean nature of 'include_summary' (default False).

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 clearly states the tool searches RSS data for articles containing specified keywords, using specific verbs ('搜索' meaning search) and resources ('RSS 数据' meaning RSS data). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_news' by specifying it searches RSS subscription data rather than general news.

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 provides clear context about when to use this tool (searching RSS subscription data with keywords) and mentions the default behavior when 'feeds' parameter is unspecified. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'search_news' or specify when not to use it.

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