Rss

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond them — that the feed returns dates in one call and lists returned fields (title, link, date) — but does not discuss rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Three tight labeled blocks (WHEN/WHAT/NOT) with zero filler, front-loading the trigger before the exclusions. Every line earns its place and is easy to scan.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required. Combined with rich when/when-not guidance and sibling routing, the description gives an agent everything needed to invoke this two-parameter read tool correctly.

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 0% for both parameters. The description partially compensates by clarifying 'до limit' (up to limit results), giving the limit parameter meaning, but 'url' is left entirely to the schema and no format/behavior detail is added. With only partial compensation for the coverage gap, this sits at the baseline.

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 ЧТО block states a specific verb and resource: fetch RSS/Atom posts with title, link, and date fields. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like fetch_page (HTML pages) and crawl/map_site (whole-feed monitoring), so an agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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 КОГДА block gives explicit positive triggers (news, blog, changelog, releases) and the НЕ block names two concrete alternatives with the conditions that select them: fetch_page for ordinary HTML, crawl/map_site for full-feed monitoring. This is textbook when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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