get_topic_details

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

Describes the output fields (subscription count, encryption status) and that it returns all topics. Lacks details on pagination or latency, but for a simple no-parameter read tool, it's adequate. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden.

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?

Two sentences: one for purpose, one for usage. No wasted words, front-loaded with the key action.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description provides essential info (output fields, use cases). Could briefly describe output shape, but sufficient for a simple list tool.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is trivial (100%). Description adds no param-specific info, but baseline for no parameters is 4.

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?

Clearly states it returns all SNS topics with subscription count and encryption status. Distinguishes from siblings like get_queue_details (SQS) and get_eventbridge_details (EventBridge).

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?

Explicitly specifies when to call: reviewing event fan-out patterns or checking subscriber count. Provides clear context for usage without stating alternatives, which is sufficient given the tool's narrow scope.

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