bh_discover_topics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says the tool 'triggers' AI analysis, which hints at an asynchronous or launched process, but it does not explain whether this mutates state, how long it takes, whether results are returned immediately, or how failures behave.

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 a single focused sentence that front-loads the core action and outcome. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundant filler or restating of the tool name.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain what the caller receives or how to retrieve results later. It only describes the trigger, leaving a gap: the sibling bh_get_topic_discoveries suggests results are stored or retrievable, but the agent is not told. This makes the definition incomplete for a tool that launches a multi-step analysis.

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 baseline of 3 is appropriate even though the tool description adds no parameter-specific detail. The description does not clarify how niche, targetAudience, and contentGoals relate to the Google Search Console analysis, but the schema already documents each parameter sufficiently.

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 a specific verb ('Trigger AI analysis') and names a clear resource ('Google Search Console data') and outcome ('high-potential SEO topic opportunities'). It reads distinctly from read-oriented siblings like bh_get_topic_discoveries, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly generative bh_generate_ideas.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as bh_generate_ideas or bh_get_topic_discoveries. The intended context is implied by the description but not stated, and no exclusion criteria or follow-up steps are provided.

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