(It’s been a few hours, but I am out of work now, so I can follow up… There may be another follow up when I can get to my machine)
The desired feeds will vary with the tool design (intended cut), material (generally carbide for our purposes), coatings (TiN, diamond, etc), and shape.
How to deal with this, which depends a LOT on the requirements of the part:
One option is reducing the depth of cut to a minimum (0.02 to 0.04mm for the Nomad-- less than 0.002"). Not always a solution, and really slows the work, but it can reduce tool breakage at the expense of increased corner and end wear.
Another is a different tool shape. If you don’t need vertical walls, use a 60 degree flat end cutter, or even a 6 degree (pattern and mold makers use these for draft). I use a 90 degree vee with 0.010" (about 0.25mm) and with 0.1mm (about 0.004") for a number to things. The vee profile gives a lot more strength than the straight cutter. Even the 6 degree taper is surprisingly more robust.
Drill corners and refine the part geometry to allow a larger cutter for the rest.
Use different machining strategies. Small bits really don’t do well for ploughing grooves (slotting). Better CAM systems take the desired feature into consideration and have strategies for efficient tool use and load control for many things that simpler tools, like MeshCam, use basic strategies for.
If you could tell us what you are trying to cut, what software you are generating tool paths with, and where the bit is breaking, that would help determine if a different tool shape/geometry and/or different software will help. There are people here that have done work with bits that small and smaller (including me), but you are into the range where everything matters.