preview_create_forum_discussion

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it does not publish or send notifications, and that it resolves permissions and audience, which is useful context beyond the annotations. However, it does not explain what 'resolve' entails or what the output looks like, so the added value is modest.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the key non-publication behavior. However, its brevity contributes to vagueness, so while it is well-structured in terms of length, it sacrifices clarity for conciseness.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It omits return value semantics, parameter details, and a concrete description of what the tool does during the 'resolve' step. An agent cannot confidently call this tool correctly based on the provided information.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the parameters. It does not explain what course_id, forum_id, subject, message, or group_id are for, leaving the agent to infer from the schema names alone. The description fails to compensate for the absence of parameter documentation.

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 the vague verb 'Resuelve' (resolves/settles) without clearly stating that this is a preview/validation step for creating a forum discussion. It only contrasts with publishing behavior, but does not explicitly say what the tool does beyond checking permissions and audience. The name suggests preview, but the description does not confirm that role.

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?

It implies usage for non-publishing checks by stating it does not publish or send notifications, which differentiates it from create_forum_discussion. However, it does not explicitly mention the alternative or state when to prefer this over the actual create tool, leaving the agent to infer the decision.

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