Browse Forums

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description need not repeat that. It adds value by stating 'Works without login' and enumerating the topic fields returned, which is useful because there is no output schema. Pagination and rate-limit behavior are not mentioned, but this is minor for a simple list tool.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the additional context about returned fields and authentication is compact and useful.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the main input modes, the auth expectation, and the returned topic fields. The unaddressed page parameter and lack of any return-structure detail leave a small but real gap, so it is not fully complete.

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 50%: the forum parameter is documented in the schema, while page is not. The description reinforces forum input semantics by explaining the omit-for-index behavior, but it adds nothing about the page parameter, so the description only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'sub-forums and topics of a forum' and clearly distinguishes the forum-index case from the targeted-forum case. This lets an agent differentiate it from siblings like forum_topic or forum_reply without opening their schemas.

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 clear call context: pass a forum_id or URL to list a specific forum, or omit the argument for the index, and notes login is not required. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, which prevents a 5.

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