list_feeds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds no behavioral context beyond what is already structured. It does not disclose response shape, pagination, authentication needs, or any other 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?

The description is extremely short and front-loaded with the core verb and resource. The endpoint line adds a small amount of concrete detail, and there is no filler or repetition beyond the near-duplication of the tool name.

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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it does not clarify what 'api feeds' represents, what the returned feed list contains, or when this endpoint should be used, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description is not required to compensate for missing parameter documentation.

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 names the resource ('api feeds') and the operation ('Get'), and the included endpoint 'GET /api/feeds' confirms the HTTP method and path. It is clear enough to distinguish from other list_* siblings, though it does not explicitly explain what an 'api feed' is.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus any alternative, no context about the data returned, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The description is purely declarative.

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