get_feed_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals ordering (newest first) and default limit (50), but omits pagination behavior, error handling, and return format, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Two clear, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The first states purpose and default behavior; the second gives a helpful pointer to list-feeds.

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 list tool, the description is adequate but missing a return format description since no output schema exists. It also doesn't explain pagination mechanics beyond the schema, leaving gaps in operational context.

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 descriptions cover all four parameters at 100% coverage, so the description adds little parameter-specific meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate per rubric when schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states it gets items from a specific feed by feed ID, with ordering. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from get_recent_feed_items or other siblings, so it lacks explicit sibling distinction.

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?

It mentions using list-feeds to discover feed IDs, which is a useful prerequisite. But it does not discuss when to choose this tool over get_recent_feed_items or search_feed_items, leaving usage implied rather than explicitly guided.

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