Manage Feedback

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it notes that list returns the agent's own submissions (newest first) and is paginated by 'before'. Annotations include destructiveHint=true, which might be interpreted broadly, but the description does not contradict annotations and provides useful operation-specific details.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently packs details about sub-actions, parameters, and pagination. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy.

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?

The description lacks explicit return value information for both create and list. For list, it says 'newest first, paginated by before' but does not state the structure of the return payload. For create, no mention of a confirmation or result. Since no output schema is provided, the description should compensate but partially fails to do so.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description groups parameters by action (e.g., mentioning that type is required for create) but largely repeats schema descriptions. It adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying that list pagination uses 'before' from a prior response.

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 that the tool sends or lists feedback, with a specific action enum distinguishing create and list. It identifies the resource (feedback) and the verbs (send/list), and the detail about categories (bug, feature, note) further clarifies the purpose. No sibling tool duplicates this functionality, so differentiation is not needed.

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 explains when to use create (for submitting feedback) and list (for viewing own submissions), including pagination details. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or provide alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide based on the action enum.

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