list_indicator_feeds

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether authentication or specific permissions are required, whether results are paginated, or what the response contains beyond the high-level purpose.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. The purpose and scope are front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description communicates the core purpose. However, given the absence of annotations and any return-value schema, it should do more to explain behavioral context or usage boundaries; it is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single required parameter account_id already documented. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter (e.g., format, source, or constraints), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('threat-intelligence indicator feeds') scoped to 'owned by a Cloudflare account'. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from siblings such as get_indicator_feed or download_indicator_feed_data by naming alternatives or contrasting scope.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_indicator_feed, list_indicator_feed_permissions, or download_indicator_feed_data. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List', with no conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites stated.

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