Read the federated timeline

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

Annotations already declare it read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it is large and unfiltered, which warns the agent about potential volume and noise. It does not describe ordering or pagination details, but those are partially covered by the parameter descriptions.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core resource definition first and practical usage direction second. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a read-only timeline tool, the combination of the description, full parameter documentation, and safety annotations is complete. The description conveys the semantic scope and noise level, and the schema covers filtering, pagination, and account selection, so an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, and each of the six optional parameters has a rich description covering defaults, pagination, account matching, and filters. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb/resource: reading the federated timeline, defined as public content federated from the rest of the network. It also implicitly contrasts with local/home timelines and explicitly differentiates from search and hashtag timelines, so an agent can distinguish it from the many sibling timeline tools.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: use it for broad, unfiltered public content, and use search or a hashtag timeline when looking for something specific. This names concrete alternatives and provides the decision condition.

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