Read a discussion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the tool renders posts as plain text but does not explicitly declare it as read-only or disclose other behavioral traits (e.g., required permissions, rate limits). The name implies safety, but the description lacks explicit reassurance.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's primary function. No redundant or irrelevant information; every word 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers what it does and includes the detail about posts being rendered as plain text. It could optionally mention the return structure, but the current description is sufficient for an agent to infer the result.

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 100%, with each parameter described in the schema. The description adds no new semantic information beyond the schema: it mentions fetching by id but does not elaborate on postLimit or id formatting. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Fetch'), the resource ('discussion by id'), and the specific output ('including its posts rendered as plain text'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_discussion, search_discussions, etc.

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 use when you have a discussion id, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_discussions or recent_discussions. Missing 'when-not-to-use' or alternative tool references.

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