get_custom_feed

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it gets posts. It does not disclose pagination behavior through cursor, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether the feed is read-only.

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 single sentence is brief but under-specified. While it is short, it lacks necessary details, making it insufficient rather than concise.

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 3 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a custom algorithm feed is, how to obtain the feedUri, or return format.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation of parameters (feedUri, limit, cursor). Users are left unclear on how to construct the feedUri or use pagination.

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 'Get posts from a custom algorithm feed' clearly states the action (get posts) and the resource (custom algorithm feed). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_timeline or search_posts, lacking context on what makes this feed 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it does not specify if this is for user-created feeds, algorithmic recommendations, or how it differs from get_timeline.

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