get_feed_digest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the result is a weekly Sunday digest summarizing four modules (implying a read-only aggregate), but it omits default behavior when date is omitted, return structure, and any access constraints.

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 tight sentence with the scope front-loaded and no padding. The only weakness is that 'all four modules' is left unexplained, which costs clarity more than length.

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 one-optional-param read tool with no output schema, the description is serviceable but leaves key gaps: what the 'four modules' are, what happens when date is absent, and how it differs from sibling feed tools. Adequate but not 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%, so the single date parameter is already documented as 'any date in the week, optional'. The description's 'week containing a date' merely restates that, adding no format or defaulting detail beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource (retrieve the Sunday digest for the week containing a date) and clarifies it summarizes 'all four modules', which separates it from the daily-feed siblings. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with get_daily_feed or get_feed_since, but the weekly-digest scope is clear.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as get_daily_feed or get_feed_since, even though these are obvious overlaps. The only usage hint is that the date is optional, which lives in the schema rather than the description.

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