Town Hall Forums

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

Annotations provide no read-only or destructive hints, so the description carries the full burden and fully delivers: it states read modes have no side effects, write modes create permanent content visible to all users, and requires JWT for writes. It also discloses safety-relevant USER_CONTENT fence markers around user-submitted content.

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 appropriately sized for a four-mode tool and front-loads the central purpose. Each bullet and sentence adds necessary information—modes, auth, side effects, content safety, and sibling routing—without filler or redundancy.

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 complexity, an output schema is present, and sparse annotations, the description is complete: it covers all operation modes, prerequisites, side-effect profiles, safety markers, and sibling-tool differentiation. An agent has enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents each parameter thoroughly, including required pairs and read-only/write annotations. The description adds high-level mode context but does not meaningfully augment the parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema contains, 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?

The first sentence states a specific verb-plus-resource ('Multi-mode Town Hall forum tool') and enumerates the four distinct operations: browse, read, create, and reply. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tools by naming civitae_browse and civitae_message and explaining what they cover instead.

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 gives explicit mode-selection guidance, including when to use browse vs read vs new vs reply, plus auth requirements. It also names the alternatives civitae_browse and civitae_message and states the exact condition that routes to each, leaving no ambiguity.

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