kafka_list_topics

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

No annotations provided, so the description should fully disclose behavior. It mentions listing with details but omits potential side effects, authentication needs, performance implications, or handling of large topic lists.

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?

Concise two-line description followed by an Args section; no wasted words. Front-loaded with main functionality.

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 low complexity (one param, output schema exists), the description adequately covers functionality. Lacks comparison to siblings or mention of limitations, but output schema handles return values.

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 single parameter include_internal is explained in the Args section with the detail that internal topics start with '_', adding value beyond the schema's default and title. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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 clearly states the tool lists all Kafka topics with partition count, replication factor, and descriptions, differentiating from siblings like kafka_topic_info which likely targets specific topics.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., kafka_topic_info). No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations; the description only explains the include_internal parameter.

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