list_feeds

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, that it supports pagination via 'after' and 'limit', or that it may require specific permissions. The agent must infer behavior from parameter names.

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, concise sentence without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. Could be slightly improved by hinting at key parameters like catalog_id, but overall efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain what is returned (e.g., feed objects, pagination info). Given the presence of sibling tools like create_feed, more context about how listing fits into the workflow would be helpful.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description. However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. For example, it does not explain that 'fields' controls output columns or that 'after' is for cursor-based pagination.

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 verb (list) and resource (product feeds for a catalog). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_feed and upload_feed, which involve different actions. However, the term 'feed' is not defined, which could be ambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_feed_uploads or create_feed. No mention of typical use cases, when not to use, or prerequisites beyond catalog_id.

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