FeedKeeper RSS/Atom reader and remote MCP Server

Move feed to folder

move_feed_to_folder

Assign a subscribed feed to a folder, or set folderId to null to remove it from all folders and keep it unfiled. Requires write scope.

Instructions

Assigns a subscribed feed to a folder, or removes it from all folders (unfiled) if folderId is null. Requires write scope. Returns { ok: true } on success.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "feedId": "<feedId>",
      "folderId": "<folderId>"
    },
    "name": "move_feed_to_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`feedId`	Yes	The numeric ID of the subscribed feed to move
`folderId`	Yes	The target folder ID, or null to move the feed to unfiled (root level)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.36.4Nov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / feedId / description

Added value: +"The numeric ID of the subscribed feed to move"

addedInput schema / properties / folderId / description

Added value: +"The target folder ID, or null to move the feed to unfiled (root level)"

First observedv0.36.3Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does a reasonable job: it discloses the write-scope requirement, the null/unfiled side effect (destructive-ish change to folder membership), and the exact success return of { ok: true }. It stops short of describing error behavior, idempotency, or what happens if feedId or folderId is invalid.

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, front-loaded with the primary action and the null case immediately after. Every sentence contributes: action, fallback behavior, auth requirement, and return shape. No filler.

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 with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the essentials an agent needs: scope requirement, null semantics, and the return value. Only error and not-found handling are unaddressed, a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the null-means-unfiled semantics. The description restates that behavior rather than adding anything new, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Assigns a subscribed feed to a folder') and covers the null case that makes this tool do double duty (move vs. unfile). It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from siblings like update_feed or create_folder, leaving an agent to infer the boundary.

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 only implied: the null branch for folderId tells an agent how to unfile, which doubles as a 'when to use this variant' cue. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over update_feed, no prerequisites beyond write scope, and no stated failure conditions.

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