get_feed_items

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral context. It only restates the function name without disclosing details such as read-only nature, return format, pagination, or error handling. There is no added context beyond the basic action, so it fails to provide meaningful behavioral transparency.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. There is no verbiage or repetition; every word contributes to the meaning. It earns its place without wasting tokens.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but lacks completeness. It does not explain what 'items' means, whether any filtering or sorting occurs, or what the response contains. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, a richer description would aid completeness.

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 schema already documents the single parameter 'feed_id' as 'Feed ID' with high coverage (100%). The description's 'from a specific feed' reinforces this mapping but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the full schema coverage.

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 action ('Get items') and the scope ('from a specific feed'), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_items' that likely retrieves items in a broader context. The verb and resource are specific, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 phrase 'from a specific feed' implies the tool is intended when the user has a feed_id in mind, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like 'get_items' or 'get_unread'. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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