get-feed-posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'fetch posts' but doesn't explain what happens during the fetch (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs, whether it's read-only, or how posts are returned). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior beyond the basic action.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to grasp immediately.

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 complexity of fetching posts (which may involve pagination, authentication, or rate limits), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, return values, or usage context, making it inadequate for a tool with three required parameters and no structured support.

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?

The description mentions 'a specified feed' which hints at the 'feed' parameter, but adds no meaning beyond what the input schema provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, as the schema already documents all parameters (feed, count, type) adequately, and the description doesn't compensate with additional context.

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 clearly states the action ('fetch') and resource ('posts from a specified feed'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-timeline-posts' or 'get-user-posts', which also fetch posts but from different sources, so it's not fully specific about what makes this tool unique.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get-timeline-posts' and 'get-user-posts' available, it doesn't specify that this is for fetching from a feed URI, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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