get_feed_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. 'Get' implies a read operation, and 'details' plus 'entry counts' indicates the return content. But beyond that, there is no disclosure about side effects, permissions, or error behavior. It is minimally transparent but not richly descriptive.

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 immediately communicates the core action and key output feature ('entry counts'). It wastes no words and is appropriately front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear read intent) and the presence of an output schema (which presumably details the return structure), the description is sufficient. It doesn't explain every possible detail, but it covers the essential purpose and a distinguishing feature (entry counts), making it complete enough for an agent to invoke 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?

The single parameter (feed_id) has full schema coverage with a clear description ('Feed ID'). The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, only emphasizing 'single feed,' which aligns with the schema. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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 tool's function: 'Get details for a single feed including entry counts.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single feed'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from list-oriented siblings by focusing on a single 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 usage context is implied by the phrase 'single feed,' which suggests this is for retrieving one feed's details rather than listing all feeds. However, there is no explicit mention of when to use this tool instead of alternatives like list_feeds_tool, and no direct exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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