Discourse

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context: no auth required for public forums, base_url inference for topic, and how the query parameter is interpreted per action. It does not mention rate limits or response format, but for a read-only tool the added context is solid.

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 well-structured: opening purpose sentence, usage context, action list, query formats, and closure on auth. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff. Front-loaded with the key verb and resource.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers action selection, parameter roles, required vs optional fields, base_url inference, and authentication. It gives enough context for an agent to correctly pick and invoke the tool without ambiguity.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by giving concrete query format examples, explaining base_url inference, and clarifying that 'latest' ignores the query parameter. This helps an agent understand parameter interplay.

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 clearly states 'Search and browse Discourse forum topics' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes itself from web_fetch_incisive by noting that tool auto-detects Discourse URLs, positioning this tool as the structured-query alternative.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this for Discourse forum lookups' and contrasts with the sibling tool ('Discourse URLs are also detected automatically by web_fetch_incisive... this tool is for structured queries when you know the forum's base URL'). Also details action-specific requirements (base_url required for search/latest, inferred for topic).

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