yd_feeds_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states basic functionality without disclosing whether it's read-only, authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or return format. Minimal disclosure.

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 two sentences, efficient, and front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose with no waste.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on feed context, response structure, or pagination. It could be more complete given the complexity.

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 has 2 parameters: feed_ids (no schema description) and client_login (schema description mentions override for multi-account). The tool description adds 'Optionally filter by IDs,' which maps to feed_ids but adds no further meaning. With 50% schema coverage, the description provides marginal value, meeting the baseline.

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 'Get feeds' with a specific verb and resource. Among siblings, there are yd_feeds_add, yd_feeds_delete, yd_feeds_update, so this tool is uniquely for retrieval, which distinguishes it well.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like yd_feeds_add or yd_feeds_get in combination with filtering. The description does not explain context or exclusions.

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