get_page_feed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the feed includes visitor posts, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, safe, or mention any authentication or rate-limit considerations, leaving some 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the main action ('Retrieve the full page feed') and immediately provides the key differentiator. Every word serves a purpose with no waste.

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 tool has 3 parameters (all documented) and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It explains the scope of the feed (visitor posts vs page posts). It does not describe the return format or pagination behavior, but the schema covers the 'after' param. For a simple read tool, this is sufficient.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add parameter details beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., page_id, limit, after). It does not explain parameter semantics further.

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 retrieves the full page feed including visitor posts, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'published_posts' which only returns page-authored posts. The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'full page feed' are specific.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (when you need the full feed including visitor posts) versus the alternative 'published_posts' (which only returns page-authored posts). However, it does not discuss other contexts or exclusions beyond this sibling comparison.

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