List RSS subscriptions

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explaining that Linkwarden polls these feeds and files entries, giving the agent insight into the side-effect context of the list operation. It does not contradict the annotation.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds value. No redundant or irrelevant 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 no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool does and its integration with Linkwarden. A minor gap is the lack of mention about the return format (e.g., list of feed names/URLs), but the agent can infer a standard list structure from the context.

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 input schema has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter elaboration is needed from the description. The description adds a point about how the feeds are used, which is relevant context for the no-parameter call.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('RSS feeds this account subscribes to'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_rss_subscription' as a read/list operation, and provides additional context about Linkwarden polling behavior.

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 implies this tool is for viewing current subscriptions before performing actions like deletion. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives for filtering or searching subscriptions among the listed siblings.

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