Read Topic

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

With no annotations, description carries burden. It states this is a read operation, but does not disclose safety (e.g., no side effects), authentication needs, or error conditions. For a simple read, this is minimally adequate.

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?

Single concise sentence with no fluff. Front-loaded with action and resource, then return fields. Could be more detailed but remains efficient.

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?

No output schema, so description should detail return values. Lists some fields but not exhaustive (e.g., missing created_at, like_count). Adequate for a basic read but not comprehensive.

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?

Description adds no meaning beyond the input schema; it does not mention parameters like topic_id, post_limit, or start_post_number. Schema has 67% coverage, but description fails to compensate for the missing field description of topic_id.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Read topic metadata and posts' and lists return fields (id, title, slug, etc.), clearly distinguishing from sibling tool 'discourse_read_post' which reads a single post.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'discourse_read_post' or 'discourse_filter_topics'. Implicitly for full topic content, but explicit direction is missing.

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