hey_list_feed

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

With no annotations, the description correctly identifies that results are cached unless force_refresh=true. This adds useful behavioral context beyond the schema, but does not disclose other traits like pagination limits, rate limiting, or what happens on cache miss.

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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and adds a key behavioral note, making it highly efficient.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, the description is adequate. It covers what the tool does and its caching behavior. However, it lacks details on return format, error conditions, or rate limits, which would be beneficial for a complete understanding.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, except implicitly tying force_refresh to cache bypass.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'emails in The Feed', and specifies it includes newsletters/notifications. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like hey_list_imbox or hey_list_drafts, which target different email categories.

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 mentions caching behavior and the force_refresh parameter, giving some usage context. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool from similar list tools, leaving the agent to infer from the resource name.

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