rss

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It only states the reading of posts; it does not reveal whether it makes a network request, how errors are handled, whether the URL must point directly to the feed, or what the output behavior looks like in edge cases.

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 first two sentences are compact and front-loaded. The last sentence, 'Паттерн RSS scrapers,' is vague and does not add useful detail, earning it not a higher score.

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 does exist, which reduces the burden of describing return values. However, parameter semantics and edge-case behavior in a no-annotation tool are left to the agent, so the definition only minimally supports correct invocation.

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%, and the description adds no explanation of the 'url' parameter or the option 'limit'. It only says that posts come from the feed, leaving the agent to guess at the semantics of of the property names.

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 identifies the URL source (RSS/Atom feed) and the returned data (posts with title, link, and date), making the tool's function recognizable and distinct from web_search or fetch_page. It lacks an explicit action verb, but the meaning is unambiguous.

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?

Gives useful targeted use cases: news, blogs, and changelogs in one call. Does not clearly describe when to avoid using this tool or mention alternatives, so the agent gets context but no explicit exclusion guidance.

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