pull_discussions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'list' and 'optional filter' but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, ordering, or any side effects. For a simple list tool, minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 concise (four sentences plus args), front-loaded with the main action, and contains no superfluous details. Every sentence adds value.

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 description covers purpose, parameter, and return type (recent discussions) but lacks details on ordering, pagination limits, or how 'recent' is defined. Given that an output schema exists, the description could be slightly more complete but is minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining the parameter 'name_or_slug' as an optional filter and specifying that an empty value returns all discussions. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type and default.

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 'List discussions' (verb+resource) and specifies that it returns 'recent community discussions from the AI Dictionary repository,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'read_discussion' (singular) and 'search_dictionary'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'search_dictionary' or 'read_discussion'). It only states the filtering option without comparing to other tools.

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