List topics

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

Without annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal a meaningful behavior: allowlist filtering. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what happens when includeInternal is false, or any return-level behavior beyond names. It adds some transparency but not rich context.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and the allowlist note is a relevant scoping detail rather than noise.

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 simple list operation with one optional, fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. It tells the agent what output to expect (topic names) and what filtering applies. Minor missing context includes whether results are ordered or paginated, but these are not critical for correct invocation.

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% for the single includeInternal parameter, so the schema already explains its meaning. The description does not need to add parameter detail, and it doesn't, which matches the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List topic names.' It is immediately clear this is a read-only enumeration operation over topics, distinguishing it from siblings like describe_topic and topic_offsets without requiring schema inspection. The allowlist filtering clause adds precise scope.

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?

The description implies usage—use this when you want topic names within the allowlist—but provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer describe_topic or other siblings, leaving the choice to inference.

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