List forum topics

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the constraint that this only works on forum-enabled supergroups, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose details about result types, pagination, or other behavior beyond the basic listing operation.

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, clear sentence with no redundant information, achieving optimal conciseness and front-loading the core 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?

For a list tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It doesn't clarify optional parameters or what the returned topics look like, leaving gaps in agent understanding.

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?

The input schema has 0% coverage with no parameter descriptions. The description only hints that peer should refer to a forum-enabled supergroup, but does not explain limit, query, or accountId semantics.

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 resource 'topics' and defines the scope 'supergroup with forum mode enabled'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_messages or list_dialogs.

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 the use case (listing topics in forum-enabled supergroups) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as create_topic or search tools. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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