list_topics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states the operation and filtering options, but does not mention result format, ordering, pagination, or any side effects. The basic read-only nature is implied, yet additional behavioral context is absent.

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 that conveys both purpose and filtering parameters without any redundant or vague wording. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a low-complexity list tool with two optional enum parameters and no output schema, the description is almost complete. It clearly states what the tool returns and which filters apply. A minor gap is lacking explicit mention of the default behavior when no filters are provided, though the schema's 'default: all' partially covers this.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It does name both parameters as optional filters ('optionally filtered by product or topic type'), adding some meaning beyond the raw property names. However, it does not explain the enum values or the meaning of the 'all' default, leaving part of the semantics to inference.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('documentation topics'), and clearly defines the scope ('all available'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_docs and get_topic by focusing on listing topics rather than searching or retrieving a single topic.

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?

The description conveys when to use the tool: to enumerate all documentation topics, with optional filtering by product or topic type. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context is clear and no misleading guidance is present.

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