get_latest_rss

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention the tool returns JSON and supports multi-day queries, but it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation or disclose any constraints like rate limits or error behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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 well-structured with clear sections: a summary sentence, a context sentence, then Args, Returns, and Examples. It is concise yet complete, with every sentence earning its place. The examples are useful for immediate understanding.

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 that the tool has an output schema (so return values are defined elsewhere) and the description covers usage context, parameter semantics, return format, and examples, it is effectively complete. No critical information is missing for a read-oriented tool.

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 Args section provides comprehensive semantics for all 4 parameters, including defaults, ranges, and examples. For instance, 'days: 获取最近 N 天的数据，默认 1（仅今天），最大 30 天' adds meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, this fully compensates.

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 states the tool's purpose clearly: '获取最新的 RSS 订阅数据' (Get the latest RSS subscription data). It also differentiates RSS data from hot news by saying 'RSS 数据与热榜新闻分开存储' (RSS data is stored separately from hot news), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_latest_news.

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 when to use the tool: '适合获取特定来源的最新内容' (suitable for getting latest content from specific sources), which gives clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls just short of a 5.

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