add_source

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses the validation parse step, rejection of invalid/dead URLs, and that nothing is written on failure. It also explains the default feeds behavior and the keep_defaults exception.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, and every additional sentence adds necessary behavioral or usage context. No fluff.

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?

With only 2 parameters and no annotations, the description covers all relevant behavior including edge cases, and the presence of an output schema handles return values.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description explains the url as the new feed and keep_defaults with practical meaning ('keep the defaults too').

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 'Validate and add a new RSS/Atom feed to feeds.txt' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_source.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when the user wants to follow a new source' and provides conditional logic for the first feed, including when to ask about keep_defaults.

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