fetch_feed

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does a lot: it discloses defaults, compact vs full post objects, the before_update_date cursor mechanism, and the response shape. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but for a fetch operation this is still substantial behavioral disclosure.

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-loads purpose, then groups required and optional parameters and return shape. Everything present is useful, and the detail is justified by ten parameters.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and heavy parameter complexity, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly: it explains the parameter set, defaults, pagination, and the returned object structure. No critical calling information appears missing.

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%, but the description compensates fully by explaining all ten parameters, including data format (tag and city examples in Arabic), defaults, and the cursor semantics for pagination. This is far beyond what the raw schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch the post feed for a tag,' and clarifies scope as 'homepage + category pages.' This is precise and distinct from sibling tools like get_post_details or search, even without naming them.

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 clearly says the tool fetches a tag feed and gives required/optional parameter guidance, including Arabic examples and defaults. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but an agent can determine when to use it from the stated purpose and parameter instructions.

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