get_unread_entries

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (fields listed) and pagination via page and per_page parameters, but does not mention ordering, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, return fields, args. Front-loaded and concise with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (so return format is partially covered), the description covers purpose, parameters, and return fields. Missing usage guidelines and behavioral details, but for a simple list tool it is fairly 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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: defaults for page and per_page, max limit for per_page (100), and explains the return structure. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'Get unread article entries from Feedbin' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_unread_entry_ids (which returns only IDs) by stating it returns full entries with fields, but does not explicitly differentiate from get_entries or get_read_entries.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_entries (all entries?), get_read_entries, or get_unread_entry_ids. The description does not mention context or exclusions.

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