freshrss_get_diverse_digest

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the safety/behavior burden and does a solid job: it discloses the category-balancing strategy, headline-only output, and token-efficiency rationale. It stops short of confirming there are no side effects on read state or describing ordering/pagination, though the name and 'get' language imply a read-only digest.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then filling in the sampling behavior, output format, and sibling navigation. There is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

The definition is nearly complete: it explains the digest's purpose, output shape, and follow-up path, and the presence of an output schema covers return structure. The main gaps are implicit auth dependency and lack of explicit no-side-effect confirmation, which matter more because annotations are absent.

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?

The description clarifies the meaning of per-category sampling ('N articles from EACH category') and the overall input expectation, but it does not explain show_read, categories, or include_uncategorized; those are left to the schema. Given the reported 0% schema description coverage, the description only partially compensates for parameter semantics.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Get a category-balanced digest of recent unread articles,' and expands with a concrete algorithm ('N articles from EACH category'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it returns headlines and pointing to get_article_detail for deep dives.

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 explicitly labels the tool as 'the primary tool for daily curation' and gives a concrete condition for switching to get_article_detail ('to deep-dive into selected articles'). This is enough for an agent to decide when this digest is the right sibling.

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