get_forum_channel_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read (a 'get'), but never states that it is read-only, whether it requires any permissions, how much data a 'detailed' response can contain, or whether 'active posts' is paginated or truncated.

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 efficient sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is not padded, though it is arguably too terse for the ambiguity created by its siblings.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description conveys the general shape of the return ('active posts and available tags'). But without annotations it omits the safety/permission profile and any indication of response size or scoping, leaving it only minimally viable.

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 100% for the single channelId parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no format guidance (e.g. whether channelId must be a forum-channel ID specifically vs. any channel), so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get detailed forum info') and even names the fields returned (active posts, available tags). However, it does not differentiate itself from the closely related siblings get_channel_info, list_forum_channels, list_forum_posts, or list_forum_tags, leaving the agent to guess which channel-info tool applies.

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 when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. With four sibling tools covering forum posts, tags, and channel info, the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.

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