get_topic_description

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

No annotations provided, and the description only indicates a read operation ('Get'). It does not disclose any behavioral traits like authorization needs, rate limits, or data volume. With no annotations, the description fails to provide needed transparency.

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 sentence, concise but lacking information. It could be improved by adding more context without being verbose.

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 is simple with one parameter and an output schema exists (not shown), the description is minimal. However, among many sibling tools, it lacks specificity to be fully complete for an AI agent to select correctly.

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?

Only one parameter 'topic_name' with no schema description coverage (0%). The description does not elaborate on the parameter's format, allowed values, or relation to other tools. The parameter name is self-explanatory but the description adds nothing beyond the schema.

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 'Get detailed description of a specific topic' states a clear verb and resource, but does not differentiate from many sibling tools like get_topic_info, get_topic_content, etc., leading to ambiguity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as get_topic_info or get_topic_configs. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.

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