delete_rss_feed

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

The description states 'Remove', implying deletion, but provides no further behavioral details such as irreversibility, side effects on associated data, or required permissions. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and fails to disclose significant behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence of 8 words, which is efficient. However, it omits some potentially useful context without becoming verbose, so it is not maximally 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?

For a simple delete operation with two clearly described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and parameter usage. However, missing behavioral transparency and usage guidelines reduce completeness to a minimum viable level.

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?

Both parameters (workspace_id and id) have schema descriptions, resulting in 100% schema_description_coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('RSS feed'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_rss_feed, get_rss_feed, list_rss_feeds, and update_rss_feed. The purpose is immediately understood.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., update_rss_feed for disabling syncing). The description lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, leaving the agent without decision support.

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