discover_communities

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

Discloses the reading behavior (clustering posts/authors) which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint). Adds context about authentication and rate limits, going beyond the annotations to inform the agent of constraints and richer functionality.

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 four concise sentences with no redundant information. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose: stating the primary function, authentication, differentiation from a sibling, and rate limiting. It is front-loaded with 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (no need to describe returns), the description covers the tool's behavior, authentication, rate limiting, and relationship to a sibling tool. It is complete for a tool of this complexity with good annotations.

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 is 3. The tool description does not add new parameter details beyond what the schema provides, but it provides overall context for how parameters ('topic') are used (searching posts and clustering authors), which is adequate.

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 discovers topic-based communities by searching posts and clustering interacting authors. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'find_similar_users' by specifying when to use each, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly mentions authentication requirements ('Works without authentication; richer with auth'), provides a condition for use ('Use this instead of find_similar_users when you want topic-based community clusters'), and notes rate limiting ('Subject to per-tool rate limiting').

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