discover_communities

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, output structure, or limitations. It only describes what the tool does, not how it behaves (e.g., whether it modifies data, pagination, or authentication needs). This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 concise with two sentences that quickly convey the core purpose. However, given the complexity of the tool (4 params, no output schema), it could afford to be slightly longer to address parameter semantics.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. It fails to explain return values, parameter behavior, or use cases, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 description adds no meaning to the 4 parameters, despite 0% schema description coverage. It does not explain what 'topic' should represent, how 'maxResults' affects output, or the role of 'minCommunitySize' and 'includeMetrics'. The agent must rely solely on schema types, which lack semantic context.

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 the tool's purpose: discovering communities and groups of users around topics or interests. It uses specific verbs ('Discover', 'Identifies') and distinctly differentiates from siblings like find_similar_users or analyze_network by focusing on topic-based clusters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., find_similar_users for user-based similarity, or analyze_network for broader network analysis). The absence of usage context leaves the agent uncertain about optimal scenarios.

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