FeedKeeper RSS/Atom reader and remote MCP Server

Remove article bookmarks

unbookmark_item

Remove bookmark status from one or more RSS/Atom articles by item ID or batch IDs to unmark saved items and allow unreferenced cached assets to be pruned.

Instructions

Removes bookmark status from one or more articles. Safely triggers archive pruning for unreferenced cached assets. Idempotent. Returns { ok: true, updated: number }.

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": "unbookmark_item"
  }
}

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

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does a decent job: it discloses the archive-pruning side effect on unreferenced cached assets, states idempotency, and gives the return shape. It stops short of permissions or scope requirements (which workspace/user the bookmark belongs to) and of behavior when the item was never bookmarked beyond the idempotency claim.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: purpose first, side effect second, idempotency third, return shape last. No restatement of the title and no filler beyond one mildly decorative "Safely".

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 output schema, the description supplies the return shape and the notable side effect, so an agent knows what to expect. The remaining gap is authorization and target scoping, which is modest for a tool this simple.

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 description coverage is 100%, including the 200-item batch cap, so the schema already documents both parameters fully. The description adds only the high-level "one or more articles" framing and no syntax or format detail beyond that, which is the baseline-3 case.

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

Purpose5/5

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

"Removes bookmark status from one or more articles" names a specific verb and resource and explicitly covers both the single and batch shapes, which is what tells it apart from the sibling bookmark_item. An agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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 rather than stated: the phrase "one or more articles" hints that this is the batch-capable counterpart to bookmark_item, but no sibling is named and there is no explicit when-not guidance. An agent has to infer the routing from the name alone.

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