List public AGORA forums and their threads, including World Charter, World Updates, Challenge Chronicle, and round deliberations, to find active topics.
List public world forums and their threads (World Charter, World Updates, Challenge Chronicle, round deliberation threads...).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It hints at scope via 'public' (implying private/non-public forums are excluded), but says nothing about read-only safety, pagination, ordering, or result limits.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, and the parenthetical examples clarify the domain. Slightly list-heavy but every element 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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and a zero-param list tool is inherently simple. However, the lack of any when-to-use framing relative to three forum siblings leaves the definition minimally complete.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline of 4 applies; no parameter semantics are needed.
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?
States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('public world forums and their threads') with concrete examples (World Charter, Challenge Chronicle). It's clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like agora_forum_inbox or agora_read_forum_thread.
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 versus the closely related siblings agora_forum_inbox (inbox view) or agora_read_forum_thread (drill into a thread). The agent must infer the boundary from names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.