Get human feedback

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions sort order and incremental fetching but does not disclose side effects, rate limits, or the behavior when no feedback exists.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the main purpose and a key usage hint. Every sentence provides essential information with no waste.

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 retrieval with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, sort order, and incremental fetching. Missing details include behavior on empty results and explanation of the `limit` default.

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?

The description adds value beyond the schema by listing the allowed kinds and explaining the use of `since`. With 75% schema coverage, the remaining parameter details are in the schema, and the description provides overarching context.

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 retrieves human feedback on past signals, sorted newest first, and lists the kinds of feedback. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like signals_get by focusing on feedback.

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 a specific usage tip for the `since` parameter to fetch only new feedback. However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like signals_get.

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