qui_get_rss_items

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

The read-only annotation already covers safety, but the description adds little behavioral context. It doesn't describe what the response contains, whether it lists all items, or any operational nuances. The mention of a JSON request body for a GET endpoint is also unexplained and could confuse an agent.

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 that communicates the essential call structure efficiently. It is well-organized and easy to parse, though it lacks specificity in favor of a reusable template.

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 the minimal schema and no visible output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't mention that instanceID is required, what the returned items are, or any limits/filters. An agent would lack the necessary context to correctly construct the request.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate but only provides a generic pattern (path vars in arguments, query in arguments.params, body in arguments.body). It doesn't specify the required instanceID or any query parameters, leaving the agent without concrete parameter semantics.

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 names the GET endpoint /instances/{instanceID}/rss/items, clearly indicating retrieval of RSS items and distinguishing it from sibling tools like qui_get_rss_rules and qui_add_rss_feed. However, it doesn't explicitly state what is returned or why one would use it beyond the endpoint name, so it's clear but not fully explicit.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only explains the mechanics of passing arguments (path/query/body), not the intended use case or how it compares to other RSS-related tools.

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