q402_redstone_feeds

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

Given no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the return shape ({ enabled, allowedFeeds, dataServiceId }), the no-auth requirement, and the rejection behavior that this tool prevents. It appropriately characterizes the operation as a read-only discovery without making side effects.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: main purpose, usage guidance, and return shape. No redundant wording.

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 discovery tool with no parameters and no output schema, this description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, why to use it, and prerequisites. It's especially strong because it tells the agent exactly how to use the returned data to avoid triggering an error later.

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?

There are zero parameters in the schema, so the baseline is 4. The description adds relevant context about authentication (no API key) and what to do with the result, but since there are no inputs, there's nothing more to explain.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Discover which RedStone feeds this deployment can drive triggers off') and clarifies that it also checks if the feature is enabled. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like q402_redstone_trigger_create by positioning this as the discovery step.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call this before q402_redstone_trigger_create and explains the consequence of using a non-allowlisted feed. Also states that no API key is required, which is a usage prerequisite.

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