List articles

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

The description discloses several behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: default returns excerpts, can return full text with include_content=true, newer-first ordering, pagination via continuation, and critical platform limitation 'FreshRSS has no full-text search over its API.' This provides rich context for safe and effective invocation.

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 sentences, each carrying distinct and essential information: function, key options, and limitation/strategy. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, with no redundant or extraneous text.

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 has 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main filtering strategy, default behavior, and a critical limitation (no full-text search). It mentions the alternative get_articles. However, it does not explain the response structure beyond 'short plain-text excerpts' or how multiple filters interact, leaving some ambiguity for complex queries.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the overall strategy (narrow with feed_id/category and date range, then filter) and the default response format (short plain-text excerpts). This synthesizes multiple parameters, going beyond individual schema descriptions.

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 'Lists articles from a feed, category, label or built-in stream, newest first.' This specifies the action (list), resource (articles), and sources (feed, category, label, stream), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_articles for fetching single articles.

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 guidance by mentioning an alternative ('fetch single articles with get_articles') and advising to narrow results with 'feed_id/category and since/until instead and filter the returned articles yourself.' It implies when to use this tool (listing multiple articles) and when not to (keyword search not possible), but it lacks explicit exclusions or precise when-to-use scenarios.

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