Feeds Parser List

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm this, nor does it mention any auth requirements, side effects, or other behavioral traits. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place and the purpose is communicated immediately.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, empty input schema) and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. It could be improved with a brief mention of when to use it relative to sibling plugin-list tools, but it is complete enough for the basic invocation.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. Per the rubric, zero parameters yields a baseline of 4 because the description cannot add or detract from nonexistent parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('feed parsers'), making the tool's purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list tools like feeds_fetcher_list or feeds_processor_list, leaving the agent to infer the difference from the resource name alone.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as feeds_fetcher_list or feeds_processor_list. The description only states what it does, not the context or conditions under which an agent should select it.

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