FeedKeeper RSS/Atom reader and remote MCP Server

Mark articles as read

mark_read

Marks one or more subscribed RSS/Atom articles as read, accepting a single item ID or a batch of up to 200 IDs. Already-read items remain read and the response reports how many changed.

Instructions

Marks one or more subscribed articles as read. Accepts a single itemId or an array of itemIds for batch processing. Idempotent: already-read articles remain read. Returns { ok: true, updated: number } where updated is the count of items that actually transitioned from unread to read.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "mark_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`itemId`	No	A single item ID to target
`itemIds`	No	An array of up to 200 item IDs to target in batch

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.36.4Nov 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / itemId / description

Previous value: -"A single item ID"New value: +"A single item ID to target"

changedInput schema / properties / itemIds / description

Previous value: -"Up to 200 item IDs"New value: +"An array of up to 200 item IDs to target in batch"

First observedv0.36.3Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does well on two fronts by disclosing idempotency ('already-read articles remain read') and the exact return shape, but it says nothing about failure behavior for invalid or unsubscribed IDs, permission requirements, or the 200-item batch ceiling.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences: purpose first, then parameter mode, then idempotency plus return value. Every sentence conveys distinct operational information with no filler or restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it does, idempotency, and the return contract, which compensates for the missing output schema. It stops short of documenting error cases or the batch size limit, which matters given the uncapped-looking input.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description slightly exceeds it by framing itemId and itemIds as alternate modes ('a single itemId or an array of itemIds for batch processing'), which the schema itself does not enforce via oneOf. The clarification is modest since the per-parameter descriptions already state single-vs-batch.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Marks one or more subscribed articles as read') and clarifies batch vs single targeting, which separates it from a bulk operation like mark_all_read. It never names a sibling tool outright, so an agent must infer the boundary from the 'one or more' scoping rather than from an explicit contrast.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied through the single-vs-array targeting and the 'subscribed articles' qualifier, which suggests targeted marking rather than a global sweep. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over mark_all_read or mark_unread, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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