Feeds Feed Create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and delivers almost nothing. 'Create' correctly implies a mutation and persistence, but the description says nothing about required configuration, permission needs, how parser/fetcher/processor defaults are applied, or whether the new feed is immediately runnable.

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?

One short sentence is technically compact but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is no front-loaded scope, no parameter context, and no routing information to earn the sentence's brevity.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a 6-parameter mutation with zero annotation coverage and zero schema descriptions, the definition is far too thin. An agent cannot determine what values a valid feed requires or what the parser/fetcher/processor fields mean.

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?

Six parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description names none of them. The required id and label, plus the parser/fetcher/processor/configuration fields and their defaults, are completely undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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 verb+resource is clear ("Create a new feed"), but 'feed' is ambiguous in this toolset where siblings include feeds_import, feeds_feed_list, feeds_feed_update, feeds_parser_list, and feeds_fetcher_list. Nothing distinguishes this feed-configuration creation from an actual import run or from the update/list variants, so an agent gets a vague sense of purpose only.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as feeds_feed_update or feeds_import. The agent must infer entirely from the name that this creates rather than modifies or executes a feed.

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