edit_forum_topic

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

Annotations already provide the core behavioral hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds the fields being edited but does not elaborate on permission requirements, side effects, or partial-edit behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. No redundant or extraneous words.

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?

The tool has four parameters (two required) and useful annotations, but no output schema. The description covers the core purpose but does not address optionality (e.g., whether at least one of name/icon is needed), permissions, or additional edge cases. It is minimally adequate for a straightforward edit operation.

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 description clarifies that 'name' refers to the forum topic's name and that the icon corresponds to icon_custom_emoji_id, which is valuable since the schema lacks descriptions for these two optional parameters. The required parameters (chat_id, message_thread_id) are already described in 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 clearly states the action ('Edit') and the resource ('forum topic'), along with the specific aspects affected ('name and icon'). It is concise and distinguishes the tool from siblings like create_forum_topic, delete_forum_topic, and edit_general_forum_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 implies usage (editing a forum topic's name/icon) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions like 'only for regular topics, not general topics.' There is no alternative guidance.

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