Import OPML

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

The description reveals significant behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it refreshes all feeds (potentially minutes), has no bulk undo, and requires a two-step process with a confirmation token. These details are critical for the agent and are not present in the annotations or schema.

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 three concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: core action and side effects, warning about undo, and the two-step process. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 the tool's complexity (two-step, destructive, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: what it does, the delay, lack of undo, and the confirmation token flow. It is slightly incomplete in not mentioning the return type of the second call (e.g., success/failure), but this is a minor 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the input schema: it explains the two-step process and the role of confirm_token. While the schema describes both parameters, the description contextualizes their usage. Baseline 3 because schema coverage is 100%, but the extra context about the two-step justifies a 4.

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 specific verb 'subscribes to every feed' and resource 'OPML document', along with creating categories and refreshing feeds. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like subscribe_feed (single feed) and export_opml (export).

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 provides clear context: it is for bulk importing an OPML file, warns about the time cost and lack of bulk undo, and explains the two-step confirmation process. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like subscribe_feed for single feeds, leaving some interpretation to the agent.

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