list_feed_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses that the operation fetches metadata only, does not load all entries, and indicates the returned fields. It does not explicitly claim read-only behavior, but 'Fetch metadata' clearly implies a non-mutating operation.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core action and purpose, then adds useful specifics. No filler or redundant phrasing is present.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what the tool does, what it returns, and a representative use case. It does not cover error behavior or URL validity, but those are not critical for selecting and invoking this 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small semantic detail ('one or more feeds') that is not enforced by the schema, but it does not significantly deepen understanding of the urls parameter beyond what the schema already says.

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 states a specific verb ('Fetch metadata') and resource ('feeds'), and clearly distinguishes from loading all entries. It also lists the exact metadata fields returned, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from siblings like fetch_feed.

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 clear context for use: building a dashboard of followed feeds and explicitly notes this tool avoids loading all entries. It implies the alternative is fetching full feed content, though it does not name siblings or state when not to use it.

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