search_feed_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It adds the default 50-item behavior and the ability to filter across all feeds or a specific feed. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, search semantics (e.g., exact vs. fuzzy), or return format, leaving some ambiguity.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and both sentences earn their place. No fluff or repetition of schema details except the useful default limit context.

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 search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and key behavioral detail (default 50). It does not elaborate on pagination or return structure, but the schema fills in parameter details, making it sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that feedId is a filter (optional) and the query applies across all feeds by default, supplementing the parameter descriptions. This helps the agent correctly use feedId and understand scope.

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: searching feed items by query, with an optional feedId filter. The verb 'search' and resource 'feed items' are specific, and the distinction from sibling list/retrieval tools is evident because it emphasizes query-based search.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool ('find items about a specific topic') and mentions the feedId filter option. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for different cases, but the usage context is sufficiently implied.

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