Fetches the homepage's newest topic list, showing category and trust level in a table. Browse recent discussions without extra per-topic API calls.
获取首页「最新」话题列表（每页约 30 条）。每条已含 category(分类名)、 min_trust_level(最低等级要求，null=无限制)，无需再逐条 get_topic 查分类。
展示约定：用 Markdown 表格，列依次为 标题(完整勿截断) | 分类 | 等级 | 回复 | 点赞 | 链接；表头与单元格一律纯文字，禁用 emoji（多字节 emoji 在生成时可能 碎成「����」乱码）。等级按 min_trust_level 显示「Lv0/1/2/3」，null 显示「—」。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
在完全没有 annotations 的情况下，描述承担了行为披露责任并做得较充分：说明了每条约 30 条、条目已含 category 与 min_trust_level、Markdown 表格列格式、禁用 emoji 的原因及 null 等级显示规则。未明确提及认证、错误行为或排序细节，但「获取」一词已暗示只读，且格式细节远超一般描述。
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?
内容按核心功能、数据保证、展示约定分层组织，核心动词和分页信息前置，没有冗余。展示约定部分较长但都为正确调用和输出服务，整体结构清晰。
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?
对于只有一个可选参数、无输出 schema、无 annotations 的简单列表工具，描述已覆盖列表范围、分页、条目字段和输出格式，调用所需信息基本齐全。页码语义和异常行为等轻微缺口不影响低复杂度工具的整体可用性。
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?
唯一参数 page 是带默认值 1 的整数，且 schema 描述覆盖率为 0%。描述补充了「每页约 30 条」的分页事实，但未说明页码如何从 1 开始、如何翻页或边界情况，属于部分弥补而非完整说明。
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?
描述以明确动词「获取」和资源「首页「最新」话题列表」开头，并说明分页规模，目的非常具体。它还通过与 get_topic 的对比（无需逐条查分类）帮助 agent 区分该工具与兄弟工具。
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?
描述了清晰的适用场景（首页最新列表），并明确给出一个排除性指引：无需再调用 get_topic 获取分类或等级字段。但没有明确说明与 search、category_topics、top_topics 等兄弟工具的选用关系，仍留有一定推断空间。
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.