List Feeds

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions return structure. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, requires no special permissions, or has no side effects. The agent cannot fully assess safety or behavioral impact.

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?

Two sentences convey purpose, scope, and return value with no redundancy. Every piece of information is essential and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema is present, so the description should thoroughly explain return structure. It mentions 'feed metadata' and 'per-user tags and pinned status' but omits specific fields, pagination, ordering, or size limits. This is minimally adequate for a simple list tool.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description reiterates the filtering options (tag and pinned_only) without adding new constraints or format details. It meets baseline but does not enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 lists subscribed RSS feeds with optional filters, distinguishing it from siblings like list_accounts or list_bookmarks. The verb 'list' and specific resource 'RSS feeds' make purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for listing feeds with optional filters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_feed_briefing or get_feed_items. No exclusions or context for when not to use are provided.

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