Get unread counts

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that results are sorted by count and only include entries with unread articles, which are useful behavioral details. No mention of scope (e.g., user-specific) or performance characteristics, but sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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 sentences with zero wasted words. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose (returns unread counts) and the second adds ordering and filtering. Perfectly front-loaded and 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers total, per-feed, and per-category breakdowns, sorting, and filtering. It does not specify whether feed/category identifiers are names or IDs, but the information is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call this tool. Sibling context (list_feeds, list_categories) can fill the gap.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining that the output includes total counts and per-feed/category breakdowns sorted by count, which compensates for the lack of output schema and clarifies the tool's value.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns unread article counts in total and per feed/category, sorted by count. It distinguishes from siblings like get_articles (which returns article content) and list_articles (which lists articles) by focusing on counts and aggregations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is clear, but the description does not mention that this tool is best for quick counts before fetching articles, nor does it contrast with list_feeds or list_categories. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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