get_reader_feed

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context about account scoping and feed selection, but it does not mention pagination, response format, or failure behavior. This is a read operation, so the risk is lower, but the transparency is limited.

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 only two sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and every sentence contributes useful information. There is no repetition or filler.

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 description explains what the tool returns and how to select feeds, but without an output schema or annotations, it leaves the response structure and pagination behavior implicit. The schema's cursor parameter hints at `next_cursor`, but the description itself is not fully complete for an agent that needs to understand the full call context.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for all four parameters with descriptions. The description adds a small amount of value by explaining how `tab` and `include_tabs` interact, but it does not expand on `limit` or `cursor` beyond what the schema states.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') with a clear resource ('Substack Notes feed') and scopes it to 'this account,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_profile_feed and list_reader_posts. It immediately tells the agent what the tool does and what domain it operates in.

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 gives concrete guidance on how to use the tool ('Pick the feed with `tab`') and how to discover available options ('set include_tabs to discover the ids available'). It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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