List Product Feeds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety. The description adds that feeds keep catalogs up-to-date and lists return fields (IDs, names, schedules, status), adding some value but not deep behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, a brief explanation of feeds, and a bullet list of args. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple read tool with annotations, the description covers the return format and arg types. It misses response_format in the text, but the schema handles it. Overall, it provides enough context for an agent to use the tool 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 description coverage is 67%. The description repeats catalog_id and limit with no extra meaning beyond the schema, and omits response_format entirely. Thus it adds little value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 product feeds for a catalog.' It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like meta_create_product_feed (create) and other list tools (e.g., meta_list_products).

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 usage: to list feeds for a catalog. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. No explicit guidance on prerequisites or context.

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