discord_get_forum_post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description repeats 'Read-only' without adding safety context. It does add useful behavioral detail about message ordering ('oldest-to-newest') and the included post fields, but it omits pagination behavior, permission requirements, and rate-limit considerations beyond what the schema provides.

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 front-loaded and efficient, covering purpose, fields, ordering, and usage in three short sentences. 'Returns a JSON object' is mildly redundant given the output schema, and 'Read-only' repeats the annotation, but neither bloats the definition significantly.

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?

With a full input schema, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description gives enough context to call the tool correctly: what it returns, the required thread_id, and message ordering. It stops short of routing the agent among sibling forum tools, but that is the main remaining gap for a low-complexity read operation.

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 schema already fully documents both parameters, including the thread_id snowflake pattern and limit range. The description only reinforces passing the thread_id and implies recent-message limiting; it adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get a forum post's details plus its recent messages. It lists the exact fields returned (title, archived/locked state, applied tags, message count), which distinguishes it from generic message reading and forum-post listing tools. An agent can tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

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 by requiring a thread_id and noting the tool is read-only, but it does not explicitly say when to use this versus siblings like discord_list_forum_threads or discord_read_messages. No alternatives or exclusions are named, leaving selection guidance to inference.

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