list_feeders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that feed totals are tracked per device rather than per cat, including a nuanced caveat about shared/stealing cats. This is a non-obvious behavioral detail beyond what the tool name suggests, though it does not mention pagination, ordering, or response format.

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 with no filler: the first front-loads purpose and contents, the second adds a necessary caveat about data interpretation. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It names the resource, the exact state fields returned, and a key semantic warning. An agent has enough to invoke and interpret the result 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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to explain. Per the calibration baseline for 0-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and a specific resource ('all PetKit Fresh Element Solo (D4) feeders'), then enumerates exactly what state information is included. This clearly distinguishes it from the action-oriented siblings feed_now and update_feeder_setting.

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 implies the tool is for read-only inventory/status checks, which contrasts with feed_now and update_feeder_setting, but it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over those alternatives or provides exclusion criteria. The usage context is clear but relies on inference.

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