meta_ads_feeds_list

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the tool is read-only and details return fields including latest_upload status and error_count. It adds context on feed health, but doesn't specify pagination, ordering, or performance characteristics.

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 efficiently convey purpose, return data, and usage advice. No unnecessary words, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

Explains return fields in detail and links to a common problem (missing products in DPA). However, it omits mention of pagination or sorting, which are relevant for a listing tool. Overall sufficient given the lack of output schema.

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 have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add additional semantic information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 lists product feeds for a Product Catalog, specifies the return fields (id, name, schedule, etc.), and declares read-only. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like meta_ads_feeds_create and meta_ads_catalogs_list by focusing on listing feeds.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to audit feed health' and explains how to interpret failed feeds. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or alternatives like meta_ads_feeds_create for creating feeds.

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